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: Date: September 28, 2020 Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation

To fund its future programmes, SURE (employment support, €100 billion) and Next Generation EU (economic recovery, €750 billion), the European Union will expand considerably its role as an issuer in the sovereign debt markets. Political agreement on these programmes earlier this year has raised hopes that at long last a common euro-denominated safe asset – backed by a joint and several guarantee – will emerge. The EU itself is as yet a minnow in international debt markets. Only €52 billion is outstanding from 18 issues. All were tied to specific programmes and passed on to member states in back-to-back transactions. EU issuance has so far been dwarfed by national issuers with high (AAA) credit ratings and by issuance by the European Stability Mechanism and European Investment Bank.

The EU needs a more modern debt issuance strategy

In issuing such substantial volumes the EU will need to compete for investors alongside other AAA-rated sovereign and supranational issuers. The vision for the EU should be to adopt the practices that it has itself promoted for national capital markets.

In issuing such substantial volumes of debt, the EU will need to compete for investors alongside other AAA-rated sovereign and supranational issuers

Typically, national governments publish a debt management strategy and state their plans for future bond issuance. In each market a small set of dealers is designated to quote a price for trades at all times, and to act as market makers. This in turn means sovereign financing costs can be kept low, and private debt is priced on the basis of a sovereign benchmark.

With greater transparency and predictability, EU bond issues could become the foundation for more integrated and liquid internal capital markets

The European Commission’s September 2020 presentation to investors underlines that the EU is not yet close to adopting such practices. With greater transparency and predictability, EU bond issues could become the foundation for more integrated and liquid internal capital markets, and the euro could ultimately become a more significant reserve currency in the international financial system. The new EU bonds would boost integration between national financial systems, but also reduce the risk of runs on national bond markets and of the destructive interaction between banking and sovereign balance sheets.

The early appeal of sovereign green bonds

A substantial part of the funding of Next Generation EU will need to be devoted to Europe’s Green Deal. To make this commitment more credible, the European Commission has now said that 30% of the funding will be raised through green bonds.

Sovereign green bonds are a very recent innovation in capital markets but have been taken up eagerly by investors, though relative to the overall market this segment remains very small. Green bonds are essentially standard bonds that offer enhanced transparency about the use of proceeds for environmental projects and expenditures. They are invariably backed by the same balance sheet of the issuer that backs standard bonds and have therefore the same credit risk. Poland and France were the first European governments to issue such bonds in 2016-17, since when seven others have joined (Table 1). Verification standards, the definition of eligible projects and expenditures, and the governance of fund allocation vary widely between the nine issuers.

Table 1: European country sovereign green bonds

 

Cumulative amount Number of issues Max maturity (years)
Poland, 2016 €3.7 bn 3 30
France, 2017 €27 bn 1 22
Hungary, 2020 €1.5 bn 1 15
Ireland, 2018 €5 bn 2 12
Netherlands, 2019 €11.6 bn 1 20
Belgium, 2018 €5.7 bn 1 15
Lithuania, 2018 €20 million 1 10
Sweden, 2020 $8.3 bn 2 10
Germany, 2020 €6 bn 1 10

 

Source: Bruegel.

 

The EU as an issuer of green bonds?

EU green bond issuance would tap into the strong demand seen so far. But the amount of EU green bonds that has been announced (€225 billion between 2021 and 2026) would be close to the total global issuance in 2019 of such instruments by the private and public sectors. Three key issues would need to be resolved for international debt markets to absorb such substantial amounts.

  • The first question is whether there will be a sufficient supply of projects within member states in line with the announced funding targets, and that fit the new EU taxonomy that defines green activities. EU countries have already funded operational as well as capital expenditures from their green bonds. Investors would be wary of past expenditures being refinanced.
  • Secondly, a more complex governance system for funds raised would need to be set up. Green bond investors – who seek strict environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards – will expect transparency on the allocation of proceeds, and ideally on the impact of the funds raised. Some member states have addressed this by issuing only to the extent and in line with green projects being generated. On occasion, separate accounts have been set up where funds were parked, though it is of course difficult to ring-fence parts of a national budget. In France, an independent green evaluation council monitors the use of funds raised. The EU as the issuer of record in all legal documentation would need to offer similar transparency and scrutiny. This may well result in tensions between the Commission and member states over allocations, further undermining the quality of the new assets.
  • Finally, the requirements of investors seeking a safe asset in a liquid European bond market will need to be reconciled with the expectations of investors seeking ESG attributes in their assets. Standard and green bonds of the same maturity and backed by the same common guarantee would be offered to the market. This could undermine liquidity and result in pricing differentials, in particular if different EU green bonds are associated with projects or monitoring practices in individual member states.

Priorities for a credible green bond standard

The new EU Green Bond Standard is now doubly needed, though so far no political agreement has been found for the proposal that was published in 2019. The Commission’s updated sustainable finance strategy, which is due before the end of 2020, offers a chance to relaunch this initiative.

As sovereign issuers will play a much more prominent role in the green bonds market, new priorities need to be set. This should be done in a way that enables national green bond frameworks to ultimately converge on a strong common EU standard.

A new class of EU green bonds must be limited to a well-defined set of projects, and it is clear the new bond standard will need to refer to the new EU taxonomy.

A new class of EU green bonds must be limited to a well-defined set of projects, and it is clear the new bond standard will need to refer to the new EU taxonomy. Alongside climate mitigation and adaptation objectives, which have been clarified, four more objectives, including biodiversity, need to be fleshed out within the taxonomy. Trade-offs between the six areas will need to be resolved.

‘Greenwashing’ by individual issuers would be a key risk, which could undermine the entire asset class. The technical working group on the green bond standard proposed that verification and reporting should be done only by accredited providers and in a standardised process. The European Securities and Markets Authority, as the EU supervisor of securities markets, would have a key role in the accreditation process, and such powers require legislation.

As for other assets, EU capital markets can become more vibrant and integrated if there is a uniform quality and transparency in each asset class. The new green bond standard should be defined to ultimately allow a single bond type to emerge, comprising both EU and national instruments.

Recommended citation:
Lehmann, A. (2020) ‘Common eurobonds should become Europe’s safe asset – but they don’t need to be green,’ Bruegel Blog, 28 September


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 about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Completing the banking union in the age of Next Generation EU

Invitation only event to discuss the banking union.

Speakers: Tuomas Saarenheimo and Nicolas Véron Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: October 27, 2020
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author
 

Policy Contribution

European Union recovery funds: strings attached, but not tied up in knots

Ensuring effective recovery spending is a high-stakes challenge for the European Union, with the potential for derailment because of fuzzy objectives and overloaded procedures. The EU should work with member countries to identify limited policies that will maximise the impact of EU investment, while accounting for spillovers.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 27, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Next Generation EU debt: how is it structured?

The impact of EU debt on the EU market of safe assets.

Speakers: Gert-Jan Koopman and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: October 22, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Without good governance EU recovery could fail

Guntram Wolff and Luis Garicano discuss how to ensure that the EU borrowing mechanism would successfully boost economic recovery.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 7, 2020
Read article More on this topic 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: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: September 25, 2020
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author
 

Policy Contribution

Why has COVID-19 hit different European Union economies so differently?

All European Union countries are undergoing severe output losses as a consequence of COVID-19, but some have been hurt more than others. Factors potentially influencing the degree of economic contraction include the severity of lockdown measures, the structure of national economies, public indebtedness, and the quality of governance in different countries. With the exception of public indebtedness, we find all these factors are significant to varying degrees.

By: André Sapir Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: September 22, 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 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 More on this topic
 

Blog Post

EU recovery plans should fund the COVID-19 battles to come; not be used to nurse old wounds

In its proposed Recovery Fund, the European Commission uses allocation criteria mainly linked to infection rates and past economic performance. To foster an efficient economic rebound post COVID-19 crisis, we propose instead to allocate funds through a forward-looking approach based on specific industrial and economic structure of EU regions.

By: Carlo Altomonte, Andrea Coali and Gianmarco Ottaviano Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: July 6, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

A tale of two pandemics

The two narratives briefly examined here cast light on different aspects of the EU in the times of Covid-19. Euroskeptic nationalists typically propagate claims of EU failure but have been rather subdued during the pandemic as mainstream governments have taken over their trademark policy of closing borders to foreigners. Nonetheless, the grip on power of several pro-EU mainstream leaders, including President Emmanuel Macron in France, Prime Minister Conte in Italy and Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez in Spain, remains tenuous.

By: Michael Leigh Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 23, 2020
Read article Download PDF
 

External Publication

European Parliament

A Just Transition Fund – How the EU budget can help with the transition

On 14 January 2020, the European Commission published its proposal for a Just Transition Mechanism, intended to provide support to territories facing serious socioeconomic challenges related to the transition towards climate neutrality. This report provides a comprehensive analysis of how the EU can best ensure a ‘just transition’ in all its territories and for all its citizens with the tools at its disposal. It provides an overview and a critical assessment of the Commission's proposal, and suggests possible amendments based on best practices from other just-transition initiatives.

By: Aliénor Cameron, Grégory Claeys, Catarina Midões and Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament Date: May 26, 2020
Read article Download PDF
 

Policy Contribution

A European carbon border tax: much pain, little gain

The European Commission should not make the implementation of a carbon border adjustment mechanism into a must-have element of its climate policy. There is little in the way of strong empirical evidence that would justify a carbon-adjustment measure. Moreover, significant logistical, legal and political challenges will arise during the design. The EU should instead focus upon the implementation of measures to trigger the development of a competitive low-carbon industry in Europe.

By: Ben McWilliams and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: March 5, 2020
Load more posts