Summary:
Starting from November 2021, the PBC has created and implemented two green structural monetary policies (Carbon Emission Reduction Support Tool and Special Loan for Clean and Efficient Coal Utilization), which provide 60% and 100% refinancing capital support to the principal of eligible carbon emission reduction loans and coal cleanup and efficient utilization loans of commercial banks. For more than two years, China's green structural monetary policy has been expanding and the scale of the balance has been growing. At the end of the 3rd quarter of 2023, the carbon emission reduction support tools balance issued by the PBC amounted to 509.8 billion yuan, and the balance of special refinancing loans to support the clean and efficient utilization of coal amounted to 262.4 billion yuan. Green structural monetary policy has an important role in promoting green and high-quality development, but there still need much more improvement and the transmission channel should be further dredged. Previous scholars have mostly quantitatively analyzed the impact of a specific green credit policy or green financial policy on green development, and most existing research related to green structural monetary policy is based on qualitative description and policy analysis, and there has not been a quantitative study specifically focusing on the effect of the implementation of green structural monetary policy. Previous scholars have not analyzed the transmission mechanism of green structural monetary policy on carbon emission reduction and energy efficiency improvement of enterprises through the technical method of data testing, and less carried out heterogeneity analysis based on the specific situation and characteristics of the target enterprises, which makes it difficult to put forward policy suggestions to promote the green development of enterprises. Based on this, it is of practical significance to test the effect of green structural monetary policy and analyze the transmission mechanism of green structural monetary policy. This paper helps the central bank to understand and grasp the implementation effect of the green structural monetary policy, timely and appropriately adjust the next stage of green structural monetary policy strength and direction, and has a positive role in promoting the implementation of green finance in the five major articles proposed by the Central Financial Work Conference. This paper firstly combs through the monetary policies of central banks in various countries to promote green development, including green QE, green mortgage collateral expansion, green preferential interest rate auctions, green violation sanctions, and green structural monetary policy. The research summarizes the results of previous scholars on the monetary policy, the transmission mechanism of the monetary policy, and the heterogeneous effects of the monetary policy to promote green and low-carbon development. From this, three hypotheses are distilled: green structural monetary policy is conducive to improving the carbon emission reduction performance and energy use efficiency of enterprises; green structural monetary policy can promote the green development of enterprises by enhancing their green innovation, reducing their financing costs and increasing their green investment; and green structural monetary policy has differentiated effects on enterprises in different regions, with different pollution levels and different nature of the effect. Subsequently, this paper examines the implementation effect and the transmission path of the green structural monetary policy. It uses DID model to test the stage-by-stage effect of green structural monetary policy (including carbon emission reduction support tools and special re-loans to support clean and efficient use of coal), and uses a mediation effect model to verify the effect of the green structural monetary policy on the implementation of green structural monetary policy by enhancing the green innovation of enterprises (using the number of green patent applications of the enterprise as an alternative indicator), lowering the cost of enterprise financing (using the short-term and long-term financing cost of the enterprise as an alternative indicator), and increasing enterprise green investment (using the green investment of the enterprise 's construction and management costs as an alternative indicator), and analyzes the channels to the enterprise level which significantly improves the enterprise's performance in carbon emission reduction and energy utilization efficiency transmission mechanism. At the same time, this paper also tests the differentiated impact of green structural monetary policy on enterprises of different natures. Clean energy enterprises, energy-saving and environmental protection enterprises, carbon science and technology enterprises, and carbon-neutral enterprises are selected as the supporting enterprises of the carbon emission reduction support tools, and energy-efficient enterprises, green and low-carbon enterprises, low-carbon science and technology enterprises, and energy transformation and upgrading enterprises are selected as the supporting enterprises of the special refinancing policy for the clean and efficient utilization of coal. Using the moderating effect model, this paper verifies the differentiated impact of green structural monetary policy on enterprises in different regions, with different pollution levels and of different natures, and puts forward policy suggestions to dredge the transmission path of green structural monetary policy and improve the regulatory effect of green structural monetary policy. The findings show that: green structural monetary policy promotes carbon emission reduction and improves energy utilization efficiency by promoting corporate green innovation, reducing financing costs, and increasing green investment; the policy has differentiated impacts on enterprises in different regions, with different levels of pollution, and of different natures. The policy recommendations are: increase the implementation of green structural monetary policy and improve the effectiveness of the policy; promote enterprise green innovation, reduce financing costs and increase green investment; implement differentiated green structural monetary policy regulation.
马理, 张人中, 马威. 绿色结构性货币政策的实施效果与传导机理研究[J]. 金融研究, 2024, 529(7): 40-58.
MA Li, ZHANG Renzhong, MA Wei. Effect and Transmission Mechanism of Green Structural Monetary Policy. Journal of Financial Research, 2024, 529(7): 40-58.
[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]陈国进、丁赛杰和赵向琴,2024,《绿色结构性货币政策、政策预期与经济绿色转型》,《金融研究》第4期,第1～19页。 [3]陈钊和陈乔伊,2019,《中国企业能源利用效率:异质性、影响因素及政策含义》,《中国工业经济》第12期,第78～95页。 [4]邓伟、杨红霞和刘冲,2024,《央行担保品政策如何支持实体经济？——基于商业信用的视角》,《管理世界》第2期,第86～103页。 [5]房芳和郭晔,2023,《创新型货币政策能够提高企业的绿色投资水平吗？——来自中国上市企业的微观证据》,《国际金融研究》第8期,第87～96页。 [6]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。 [7]何德旭和程贵,2022,《绿色金融》,《经济研究》第10期,第10～17页。 [8]何莎,2023,《中央银行碳减排支持工具、政策模拟与评估——基于环境动态随机一般均衡模型分析》,《国际金融研究》第11期,第16～27页。 [9]胡珺、方祺和龙文滨,2023,《碳排放规制、企业减排激励与全要素生产率——基于中国碳排放权交易机制的自然实验》,《经济研究》第4期,第77～94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105～121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]林伯强和潘婷,2022,《环境管制如何影响绿色信贷发展？》,《中国人口·资源与环境》第8期,第50～61页。 [13]刘海明和曹廷求,2018,《续贷限制对微观企业的经济效应研究》,《经济研究》第4期,第108～121页。 [14]刘亦文、阳超、周韶成和张漾滨,2022,《绿色信贷政策对企业环境信息披露的影响研究》,《统计研究》第11期,第73～87页。 [15]马广程、曹建华和丁徐轶,2024,《非位似偏好、碳市场与异质性政策协调的减排效应》,《中国工业经济》第2期,第42～60页。 [16]马理、张人中、马威和牛慕鸿,2023,《能源结构有序调整与绿色信贷政策调控》,《金融研究》第1期,第94～112页。 [17]毛其淋和王玥清,2023,《ESG的就业效应研究:来自中国上市公司的证据》,《经济研究》第7期,第86～103页。 [18]潘冬阳、陈川祺和Grubb Michael,2021,《金融政策与经济低碳转型——基于增长视角的研究》,《金融研究》第12期,第1～19页。 [19]彭俞超、汪凡智、倪骁然和韩晗,2023,《绿色金融考核的社会责任引导效应——基于宏观审慎评估体系的视角》,《南开经济研究》第11期,第72～89页。 [20]邱牧远和殷红,2019,《生态文明建设背景下企业ESG表现与融资成本》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第3期,第108～123页。 [21]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12期,第123～137页。 [22]王馨和王营,2021,《绿色信贷政策增进绿色创新研究》,《管理世界》第6期,第173～188页。 [23]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。 [24]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。 [25]文书洋、刘浩和王慧,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。 [26]谢东江和胡士华,2023,《绿色金融、产业结构与城市工业绿色全要素生产率》,《国际金融研究》第5期,第46～56页。 [27]喻旭兰和周颖,2023,《绿色信贷政策与高污染企业绿色转型:基于减排和发展的视角》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第7期,第179～200页。 [28]张琦、郑瑶和孔东民,2019,《地区环境治理压力、高管经历与企业环保投资——一项基于《环境空气质量标准(2012)》的准自然实验》,《经济研究》第6期,第183～198页。 [29]中国人民银行货币政策司课题组,2024,《结构性货币政策助力做好“五篇大文章”》,《中国金融》第2期,第25~27页。 [30]朱民和彭道菊,2022,《创新内含碳中和目标的结构性货币政策》,《金融研究》第6期,第1～15页。 [31]Ahmad, M., and E. Satrovic, 2023. “How does Monetary Policy Moderate the Influence of Economic Complexity and Technological Innovation on Environmental Sustainability？ The Role of Green Central Banking”, International Journal of Finance & Economics: 1～28. [32]Diaz de León,A., 2019. “Remarks by Alejandro Díaz De León, Governor of Banco De México, at the Seminar on Greening the Financial System”, Banco De Mexico, January. [33]Aloui, D., R. Benkraiem, K. Guesmi, and S. Vigne, 2023. “The European Central Bank and Green Finance: How Would the Green Quantitative Easing Affect the Investors' Behavior During Times of Crisis？”, International Review of Financial Analysis, 85: 102464. [34]Aswani, J., A. Raghunandan, and S. Rajgopal, 2023. “Are Carbon Emissions Associated with Stock Returns？”, Review of Finance, 28(1): 1～23. [35]Bailey, A., 2021. “Bank of England Publishes Its Approach to Greening the Corporate Bond Purchase Scheme”, Bank of England, November. [36]Guo, S., and Z. Zhang, 2023. “Green Credit Policy and Total Factor Productivity: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies”, Energy Economics, 128: 107115. [37]Kuroda, H., 2022. “Boj Green Loans Scheme Gets Underway”, Bank of Japan, January. [38]Lagarde, C., 2022. “ECB Takes Further Steps to Incorporate Climate Change Into Its Monetary Policy Operations”, European Central Bank, July. [39]Lu, Y., Y. Gao, Y. Zhang, and J. Wang, 2022. “Can the Green Finance Policy Force the Green Transformation of High-Polluting Enterprises？ A Quasi-natural Experiment Based on “Green Credit Guidelines””, Energy Economics, 114: 106265. [40]Zaghini, A., 2024. “Unconventional Green”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 85: 102556.
