Summary:
As the core element of modern economic development, finance provides support for green transformation and green governance. At present, the main relevant financial products are green credit, green bonds, and carbon account trading. In 2007, the China Banking Regulatory Commission (CBRC) issued the “Guiding Opinions on Credit Granting for Energy Conservation and Emission Reduction” and the “Guidelines of Issuing Green Credit” to standardize heavily polluting enterprises and promote the development of industries related to energy conservation, emission reduction, and environmental protection. In 2012, the CBRC issued the “Green Credit Guidelines” to establish an institutional framework for green finance, guide the rational allocation of bank credit resources, improve the risk-taking of green enterprises, and strengthen the incentive for substantive enterprise innovation. Following the strengthening of green credit regulation, enterprises that do not achieve emission reductions will face rising interest rates, and it will be more difficult for them to obtain loans. The expansion of green credit has promoted the development of China's green financial system, helped enterprises to use financial resources for green governance, and promoted economic transformation and high-quality development. In contrast to green credit, which concerns banks and pollution-related industries, green bonds can examine the direct impact of green finance at the micro level of enterprises. Issuers of green bonds pay attention to environmental performance and obtain more holdings from long-term investors and green investors than is the case for traditional bonds. The latest research by Chinese scholars finds that the inclusion of green bonds in the qualified collateral policy of the central bank forces brown enterprises to transform into green enterprises, and substantially improves the green innovation of the bond issuers. Green bond issuance has an industry spillover effect, which greatly reduces the bond financing cost of other enterprises in the same industry. Enterprises issue green bonds to obtain market incentives. The improvement of green governance and the alleviation of financing constraints are motivations. Based on the credit bonds issued by non-financial enterprises from 2010 to 2021, this paper examines the impact of green bonds on the financing cost of enterprises. The results are as follows. First, we find that green bonds substantially reduce corporate financing costs, a result that remains robust after conducting propensity score matching, excluding special industry bonds and the influence of the underwriter rebate ban, and conducting a two-stage least squares analysis based on visible public goods. Second, our results indicate that enterprises' environmental governance and green innovation can considerably improve the market's recognition of green bonds. Finally, this paper reveals the correction effect of government regulation and environmental governance. It examines government regulation from the perspectives of government expenditure and employees, and then analyzes environmental governance from the perspective of environmental entropy and environmental protection inputs. In regions with stronger government supervision abilities and better environmental governance than other regions, green bonds have a stronger role in reducing corporate financing costs. In particular, green bonds help investors to certify the green transformation of heavily polluting enterprises and reduce the financing costs of these enterprises. In contrast with the literature, this paper attempts to conduct cross-cutting research from three aspects: finance, environmental governance, and government regulation. We make the following three contributions. First, we enrich the research on green finance by conducting our analysis from the perspective of green bonds. It is difficult to conduct research on green credit at the enterprise level because data on bank loans and green labels are required. Conversely, as data on green bonds are publicly disclosed, green bonds can provide samples and details that enable direct observation. Thus, our study provides a research entry point for academia to explore green finance. Second, the conclusion of this paper indicates that green bonds can substantially reduce firms' financing costs. Third, this paper examines the rectifying effect of government regulation at the city level. Government regulation and environmental governance can help strengthen the role of green bonds in reducing financing costs and support the important role of “effective government” in leading green transformation. The government optimizes the allocation of resources and improves public and environmental governance, which helps promote the green transformation of heavily polluting enterprises and enhance market recognition.
张小茜, 王志伟. 绿色债券有利于降低企业融资成本吗——来自政府监管和环境治理的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 519(9): 94-111.
ZHANG Xiaoqian, WANG Zhiwei. Is Issuing Green Bonds Helpful in Reducing Corporate Financing Costs？ From the Perspectives of Government Regulation and Environmental Governance. Journal of Financial Research, 2023, 519(9): 94-111.
[1]陈国进、丁赛杰、赵向琴和蒋晓宇,2021,《中国绿色金融政策、融资成本与企业绿色转型——基于央行担保品政策视角》,《金融研究》第12期,第75～95页。 [2]陈奉功和张谊浩,2023,《绿色债券发行、企业绿色转型与市场激励效应》,《金融研究》第3期,第131～149页。 [3]陈诗一、张建鹏和刘朝良,2021,《环境规制、融资约束与企业污染减排——来自排污费标准调整的证据》,《金融研究》第9期,第51～71页。 [4]陈云贤,2019,《中国特色社会主义市场经济:有为政府+有效市场》,《经济研究》第1期,第4～19页。 [5]丁宁、任亦侬和左颖,2020,《绿色信贷政策得不偿失还是得偿所愿？——基于资源配置视角的PSM-DID成本效率分析》,《金融研究》第4期,第112～129页。 [6]范子英和赵仁杰,2019,《法治强化能够促进污染治理吗？——来自环保法庭设立的证据》,《经济研究》第3期,第21～37页。 [7]高昊宇和温慧愉,2021,《生态法治对债券融资成本的影响——基于我国环保法庭设立的准自然实验》,《金融研究》第12期,第133～151页。 [8]郭晔和房芳,2021,《新型货币政策担保品框架的绿色效应》,《金融研究》第1期,第91～110页。 [9]黄群慧、刘尚希、张车伟、张晓晶、杨开忠、胡滨和闫坤,2021,《从党的百年奋斗重大成就和历史经验总结中思考推进中国经济学“三大体系”建设——学习贯彻党的十九届六中全会精神笔谈》,《经济研究》第12期,第4～19页。 [10]黄振和郭晔,2021,《央行担保品框架、债券信用利差与企业融资成本》,《经济研究》第1期,第104～127页。 [11]李俊成、彭俞超和王文蔚,2023,《绿色信贷政策能否促进绿色企业发展？——基于风险承担的视角》,《金融研究》第3期,第112～130页。 [12]罗知和齐博成,2021,《环境规制的产业转移升级效应与银行协同发展效应——来自长江流域水污染治理的证据》,《经济研究》第2期,第174~189页。 [13]毛捷、郭玉清、曹婧和徐军伟,2022,《融资平台债务与环境污染治理》,《管理世界》第10期,第96～109页。 [14]苏冬蔚和连莉莉,2018,《绿色信贷是否影响重污染企业的投融资行为？》,《金融研究》第4期,第123～137页。 [15]王遥、潘冬阳、彭俞超和梁希,2019,《基于DSGE模型的绿色信贷激励政策研究》,《金融研究》第11期,第1～18页。 [16]王营和冯佳浩,2022,《绿色债券促进企业绿色创新研究》,《金融研究》第6期,第171～188页。 [17]文书洋、刘浩、王慧,2022,《绿色金融、绿色创新与经济高质量发展》,《金融研究》第8期,第1～17页。 [18]吴敏和周黎安,2018,《晋升激励与城市建设: 公共品可视性的视角》,《经济研究》第12期,第97～111页。 [19]吴育辉、田亚男、陈韫妍和徐倩,2022,《绿色债券发行的溢出效应、作用机理及绩效研究》,《管理世界》第6期,第176～190页。 [20]张琦和邹梦琪,2022,《环境治理垂直改革的效果、基层机制与影响因素》,《经济研究》第8期,第172～190页。 [21]张晓晶,2022,《经济新常态》,《经济研究》第7期,第4～11页。 [22]中国式现代化研究课题组,2022,《中国式现代化的理论认识、经济前景与战略任务》,《经济研究》第8期,第26～39页。 [23]Baker, M., D. Bergstresser, G. Serafeim, and J. Wurgler, 2018, “Financing the Response to Climate Change: The Pricing and Ownership of US Green Bonds”, NBER Working Paper. [24]Cao, J., M. S. Ho, R. Ma, and F. Teng, 2021, “When Carbon Emission Trading Meets a Regulated Industry: Evidence from the Electricity Sector of China”, Journal of Public Economics, 200: 1～26. [25]Chen, Z., M. E. Kahn, and Y. Liu, and Z. Wang, 2018, “The Consequences of Spatially Differentiated Water Pollution Regulation in China”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 88: 468～485. [26]Ding, Y., W. Xiong, and J. Zhang, 2022, “Issuance Overpricing of China's Corporate Debt Securities”, Journal of Financial Economics, 144(1): 328～346. [27]Engle, R. F., S. Giglio, B. T. Kelly, H. Lee, and J. Stroebel, 2020, “Hedging Climate Change News”, Review of Financial Studies, 33(3): 1184～1216. [28]Fan, H. Y. Peng, H. Wang, Z. Xu, 2021, “Greening Through Finance？”, Journal of Development Economics, 152, 102683. [29]Flammer, C., 2021, “Corporate Green Bonds”, Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2): 499～516. [30]Hao, Y. and J. Lu, 2018, “The Impact of Government Intervention on Corporate Investment Allocations and Efficiency: Evidence from China”, Financial Management, 47(2): 383～419. [31]He, G., S. Wang, and B. Zhang, 2020, “Watering Down Environmental Regulation in China”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(4): 2135～2185. [32]Huang, Z., N. Gao, and M. Jia, 2023, “Green Credit and Its Obstacles: Evidence from China's Green Credit Guidelines”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 82, 102441. [33]Karpf, A., and A. Mandel, 2018, “The Changing Value of the ‘Green' Label on The US Municipal Bond Market”, Nature Climate Change, 8(2): 161～165. [34]Larcker, D. F., and E. M. Watts, 2020, “Where's the Greenium？”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 69, 101312. [35]Magne, M., A. Torgovitsky, and C. R. Walters, 2021, “The Causal Interpretation of Two-Stage Least Squares with Multiple Instrumental Variables”, American Economic Review, 111(11): 3663～3698. [36]Nanayakkara, M., and S. Colombage, 2019, “Do Investors in Green Bond Market Pay a Premium？ Global Evidence”, Applied Economics, 51(40): 4425-4437. [37]Pastor, L., R. F. Stambaugh, and L. A. Taylor, 2022, “Dissecting Green Returns”, Journal of Financial Economics, 146(2): 403～424. [38]Shi, Y., J. Wu, and Y. Zhang, 2023, “Green Image in Supply Chains: Selective Disclosure of Green Suppliers”, Working Paper. [39]Tang, D. Y., and Y. Zhang, 2020, “Do Shareholders Benefit from Green Bonds？”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 61, 101427. [40]Wang, J. Z., X. Chen, X. X. Li, J. Yu, R. Zhong, 2020, “The Market Reaction to Green Bond Issuance: Evidence from China”. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 60(4), 101294. [41]Xu, Q. and T. Kim, 2022, “Financial Constraints and Corporate Environmental Policies”, The Review of Financial Studies, 32(2): 576～635. [42]Zerbib, O. D., 2019, “The Effect of Pro-environmental Preferences on Bond Prices: Evidence from Green Bonds”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 98(9): 39～60.
