為了務(wù)實(shí)推動(dòng)綠債標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的一致化工作，促進(jìn)綠色資本的跨境流動(dòng)，中國綠金委和歐投行重點(diǎn)合作研究如何建立一套標(biāo)準(zhǔn)“翻譯”機(jī)制——綠債領(lǐng)域的“羅塞塔石碑”[11]。有了這套機(jī)制，中歐兩方的不同標(biāo)準(zhǔn)將首先變成“可比的”（comparable），進(jìn)而變成“兼容的”（compatible）。從實(shí)踐層面講，這意味著，中歐雙方首先在一套基本的框架結(jié)構(gòu)上達(dá)成共識(shí)，然后兩方再用自己的技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對綠色進(jìn)行定義，將符合綠色定義的債券資金用途寫入共同框架。“羅塞塔石碑”的最終版本將為國際投資者揭示究竟一只債券應(yīng)該被貼上“中國綠色”的標(biāo)簽、“歐盟綠色”的標(biāo)簽，還是“中歐綠色”的標(biāo)簽。

 

以上，對于全球綠色標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不統(tǒng)一的問題，解決之道不是通過孤立的一刀切式的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化，而是通過雙管齊下的“和諧化”， 即：在盡可能多的項(xiàng)目領(lǐng)域統(tǒng)一中歐雙邊綠色標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，在無法統(tǒng)一的領(lǐng)域，通過創(chuàng)建一套標(biāo)準(zhǔn)翻譯機(jī)制來解決分歧。這種路徑即可以達(dá)到綠色標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的國際化，又能同時(shí)兼容不同國家和地區(qū)在不同階段的發(fā)展需求。

 

鑒于中國和歐洲是全球綠債市場的主要發(fā)行端[12]和投資端[13]，這種“和諧化”的路徑將不僅限于解決中歐之間標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不統(tǒng)一的問題，更有利于樹立全球典范，促使其他國家也將他們的技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)加入到“羅塞塔石碑”中來，搭建一個(gè)全球性的綠色定義框架。GBP有潛力成為這一全球框架形成的有力推手，ICMA在其2018年年會(huì)上也討論了類似“羅塞塔石碑”的想法，但此理念尚未被其采用。筆者建議歐盟和中國政府也可以將這個(gè)想法帶到二十國集團(tuán)和聯(lián)合國等多邊機(jī)制中去，加強(qiáng)對這一概念的宣傳, 早日形成一套和諧的綠色債券標(biāo)準(zhǔn)“翻譯”系統(tǒng)，加速全球綠債市場的形成和健康發(fā)展。

 

附注

[1] CBI, 2013 Overview: the Dawn of an Age of Green Bonds?, (2014)

https://www.climatebonds.net/2014/05/2013-overview-dawn-age-green-bonds, p.1

[2] The project categories the that are listed as appropriate use of proceeds within the GBP are: 1.Renewable energy, 2.energy efficiency, 3.Pollution prevention and control, 4. environmentally sustainable management of living natural resources and land use, 5.terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity conservation. 6.clean transportation, 7.sustainable water and wastewater management, 8/climate change adaption, 9.Eco-efficient and/or circular economy adapted products, production technologies and processes, 10.green buildings. (ICMA, 2018)

[3] ICMA, Green Bond Principles (GBP), (2018).

[4] Japan, Guidelines Summary, (2017), p.8

[5] Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Disclosure Requirements for Issuance and Listing of Green Debt Securities, (2017) - https://www.sebi.gov.in/legal/circulars/may-2017/disclosure-requirements-for-issuance-and-listing-of-green-debt-securities_34988.html

[6] ACMF, ASEAN Green Bond Standards, (2017), p.2

[7] Ibid

[8] ‘the Guidelines for Establishing the Green Financial System’ (the Guidelines) by the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) and six other ministries in August 2016, the centralizing efforts under the umbrella of the ‘Development Plan for Building the Standardization System for the Finance Sector (2016-2020)’, and more recently ‘the Green Bond Assessment and Verification Guidelines (Provisional)’ in December 2017.

[9] CBI, Chinese Regulators Introduce Supervisory Scheme Green Bond Verifiers, (2018)

https://www.climatebonds.net/2018/01/chinese-regulators-introduce-supervisory-scheme-green-bond-verifiers-further-step-building

[10] EIB-CGFC, The Need For a Common Language in Green Finance, (2017)

[11] EIB-CGFC, The Need For a Common Language in Green Finance, (2018)

[12] Among the top 10 green bond issuing EU-countries and China in 2017: #2 China, #3 France, #4 Germany, #5 Sweden, #6 Spain, #7 Netherlands

CBI, Green Bond Highlights 2017, (2018), p.2

[13] Almost 50 percent of all European investment funds were governed with SRI strategies in 2016. Only 0.8 percent of funds in Asia (without Japan) are governed with SRI strategies.

 

作者：Joris Teer  中央財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)綠色金融國際研究院國際合作處助理研究員

編譯：王亞麗  中央財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)綠色金融國際研究院國際合作處研究員