Blog Post

Green bonds: who is to certify ‘sustainability’?

Poland’s issue of a green bond earlier this month was the country’s second financing of this type, and the first ever repeat issue by a sovereign. It has revived the debate as to whether there should be a single regulatory standard to certify the environmental quality of financial assets. This will be a key issue for the EU’s sustainable finance strategy which is due to be released shortly.

By: and Date: February 19, 2018 Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation

Global climate targets, and in particular the Paris Agreement of 2015, have fuelled investor demand for ‘sustainable’ financial assets. This is now reinforced by the scrutiny that supervisors apply to the carbon exposures of the financial industry, and the attempt to mitigate the financial stability risks of a transition to a low-carbon economy.

As a conventional bond, a green bond is debt contracted for projects with an extended life-time, though such projects must have certain environmental qualities. By holding such assets institutional investors demonstrate their adherence to their own sustainability targets, and reduced exposure to climate-related financial risks. There are now 17 dedicated green bond funds in Europe, and the investor base increasingly comprises foundations and the treasuries or pension funds of large companies. Issuers of green bonds gain visibility with their own sustainability strategies and will access a wider investor base. This could be an important benefit when liquidity in corporate bond markets recedes, and market access becomes more uncertain.

The green bond market is, as yet, a fraction of the international debt market. Total international issuance of both public and private green bonds of $120 billion in 2017 pales in comparison to overall global bond issuance of around $21 trillion.

But growth has been very rapid in the last three years, which may explain the policy attention that the market now attracts. As the range of issuers and sustainability objectives widens, the challenge is to safeguard the reputational benefit of a green bond issue.

Disclosure must be adequate to prevent superficial labelling (‘greenwash’) and ongoing evaluation should discipline the flouting of announced sustainability targets in the use of proceeds (a ‘green default’). Unlike a project-specific bond, a municipal or sovereign issue will suffer from the inherent fungibility of proceeds within a large and complex public budget. France’s recently announced pipeline of long-term green projects likely sets a standard in this regard.

Clearly, for the green bond market to grow further, a credible common standard is needed. This should allow the investor to verify the environmental quality of the underlying assets, and account to its own beneficiaries. A common standard reduces due diligence costs compared to a process of self-certification and decentralised assessments by individual asset managers, however good the level of disclosure by the issuer. The question for the EU capital market is who should set this standard.

So far, certification has been led by the industry. The Green Bond Principles of 2014 make broad recommendations for the use of proceeds, project evaluation and reporting. The Climate Bond Initiative is more demanding, as it certifies compliance with criteria in many of the 46 sectors that it tracks. Rating agency Moody’s has designed an evaluation standard that also offers an ongoing assessment throughout the lifetime of the bond. Several EU financial centres, including the Luxembourg stock exchange, have adopted issuance standards that are based on these industry norms.

It is clear that a single EU standard could foster transparency, scale and liquidity in the market for sustainable financial assets

The opposing case for a regulatory harmonisation has now been made by the EU Expert Group on sustainable finance which released its final report last month.

In its view, a single EU standard should bring greater clarity over the underlying assets and their compatibility with sustainability goals set by the EU. At first harmonisation would be limited to stricter documentation standards and the accreditation of private-sector companies that evaluate green investment objectives. But ultimately the EU green bond label would be based on a European sustainability taxonomy. It is likely this would narrow down the objectives currently supported by private-sector labels.

The expert group also developed its proposals for so-called supporting factors in the prudential treatment of sustainable financial assets. While it is problematic to mix objectives in environmental sustainability with those in financial stability, this proposal would no doubt depend on there being a single EU-wide norm for green assets.

It is clear that a single EU standard could foster transparency, scale and liquidity in the market for sustainable financial assets. A single asset class could more easily be defined, and issuance premia and performance relative to other financial benchmarks could be tracked. Financial innovation, including structured products or securitisation, could attract additional capital.

That said, private standards have kick-started the market and have remained responsive to the issuers’ underlying portfolios, and technological change in the industry. ‘Greenness’ of projects is of course a fluid concept in a highly innovative industry. External evaluations of issuer information draw on deep industry expertise in environmental accounting (e.g. specific mitigation claims). As the Commission now prepares its sustainable finance strategy it should be cautious in imposing a single taxonomy that may not do justice to the complexity and dynamism of the industry.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

US separates climate concerns from financial oversight in contrast to EU activism

Different EU and US supervisory approaches to climate risk may hamper efforts to work together and risk fragmenting global markets.

By: Rebecca Christie Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: February 18, 2021
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Building back greener: sustainable finance and the Green Deal

How could additional regulation incentivise investment while upholding the integrity of sustainable finance?

Speakers: Klaas Knot, Sean Kidney, Alexander Lehmann, Isabelle Mateos y Lago and Philipp von Restorff Topic: Energy & Climate, Finance & Financial Regulation Date: February 11, 2021
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Disruption or transformation: the impact of a digital euro on the financial system

How would a digital Euro impact the financial system?

Speakers: Fabio Panetta and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation Date: February 10, 2021
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Green bonds and green finance innovation

Invitation-only event to discuss innovations in green finance and sovereign and EU issuance of green bonds

Speakers: Dion Bongaerts, Niall Bohan, Monica Girardi, Zoe Knight, Moritz Kraemer, Alexander Lehmann, Michael Mainelli, Lucia Silva and Alexandre Vincent Topic: Energy & Climate, Finance & Financial Regulation Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: January 26, 2021
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Contribution

Green certificates: a better version of green bonds

"The current design of green bonds means they aren't fulfilling their potential. We propose an alternative: issuance of regular bonds with attached green certificates that ensure earmarking for green purposes. The new design would reduce financing costs and in turn would provide incentives to start a greater number of environmentally-friendly projects."

By: Dion Bongaerts and Dirk Schoenmaker Topic: Energy & Climate, Finance & Financial Regulation Date: November 26, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

Common eurobonds should become Europe’s safe asset – but they don’t need to be green

The plan to fund the European Union’s recovery programme via debt issuance has raised hopes that a new type of euro-denominated safe asset could emerge. As a priority, the European Commission needs a strategy to create a liquid and transparent market in EU bonds. For now, funding through EU green bonds would complicate that effort.

By: Alexander Lehmann Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: September 28, 2020
Read article More by this author
 

Opinion

Europe’s recovery gamble

Next Generation EU, was rightly hailed as a major breakthrough: never before had the EU borrowed to finance expenditures, let alone transfers to member states. But the programme and its Recovery and Resilience Facility amount to a high-risk gamble.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation Date: September 25, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

Redefining European Union green bonds: from greening projects to greening policies

European Union green bonds, as promised by European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, might be better linked to the bloc's achievement of its climate goals, rather than project-by-project green criteria.

By: Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate Date: September 21, 2020
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

The Sound of Economics Live: The State of the Union going forward

In the first Sound of Economics Live episode after summer we look at the State of the Union address delivered by Ursula von der Leyen.

Speakers: Giuseppe Porcaro, André Sapir, Guntram B. Wolff and Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: September 16, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Without good governance, the EU borrowing mechanism to boost the recovery could fail

The European Union recovery fund could greatly increase the stability of the bloc and its monetary union. But the fund needs clearer objectives, sustainable growth criteria and close monitoring so that spending achieves its goals and is free of corruption. In finalising the fund, the EU should take the time to design a strong governance mechanism.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: September 15, 2020
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Brief

Rebooting Europe: a framework for a post COVID-19 economic recovery

COVID-19 has triggered a severe recession and policymakers in European Union countries are providing generous, largely indiscriminate, support to companies. As the recession gets deeper, a more comprehensive strategy is needed. This should be based on four principles: viability of supported entities, fairness, achieving societal goals, and giving society a share in future profits. The effort should be structured around equity and recovery funds with borrowing at EU level.

By: Julia Anderson, Simone Tagliapietra and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 13, 2020
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

CANCELLED: How adequate is the European toolbox to deal with financial stability risks in a low rate environment?

Bruegel is delighted to welcome the governor of the Central Bank of Ireland, Gabriel Makhlouf. He will deliver a keynote address about how adequate the European toolbox is to tackle financial stability risks in a low rate environment. Following his speech, a panel of experts will further discuss the topic.

Speakers: Gabriel Makhlouf, Guntram B. Wolff and Agnès Bénassy-Quéré Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: March 31, 2020
Load more posts