Green Finance最新文献

Financing ecological and other grand global challenges is faced with intertwined issues at both the institutional side and the public side as elements of the tragedy of the quintuple horizons. These horizons are approached from a systemic perspective, with attention on the key players involved. Starting with (system) banks, their conservative attitude is explained in terms of the iron cage theory. Next, green challenges are pictured as 'very wicked' problems, varying in moral intensity. The conflicting roles of the public as citizens and as consumers are described in terms of Kohlberg's theory of cognitive moral development. Responsibilities for future generations are clarified by distinguishing the responsibility as accountability and the responsibility as virtue. Assignments for a green future are explored from the perspective of green financing with a focus on what should be expected from the public at large in multiparty democratic societies, keeping in mind that other societies are characterized by diverting economic and political dynamics, and hence, other modes of operating¹.

¹ See, for instance, for China: Macaire & Naef (2022) and Liu, Wang, Zhang & Zhang (2019).

Sustainable development is a key issue of global concern, and countries around the world are striving to promote green development. From the perspective of financial asset allocation motivation, this paper explores the impact of financial asset allocation on green innovation based on the data of A-share listed non-financial companies from 2011 to 2021. First, there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the proportion of financial asset allocation and the green innovation of physical enterprises, that is, as the proportion of financial asset allocation increases, the green innovation output of enterprises first increases and then decreases. After robustness testing, the conclusion still holds. Second, further testing of the intermediary mechanism shows that the moderate holding of short-term financial assets by real enterprises can increase the output of green innovation by alleviating financing constraints, which is manifested as the "reservoir" effect. The "crowding out" effect plays a leading role when overallocation of financial assets reduces liquidity supply and capital expenditure, which in turn reduces green innovation output. Third, in the test of financial asset allocation preference, it is found that the short-term financial assets held by enterprises mainly play a "reservoir" effect, that is, they tend to be "preventive" motives. Holding long-term financial assets mainly exerts a "crowding out" effect, that is, tends to "seek profits" motives. Finally, there are differences in the impact of financial asset allocation on green innovation output among enterprises with different property rights, different monetary policies and different social responsibilities.

With the aim of effectively preventing and controlling systemic risk, by stimulating the advancement of the green bond market, it is significant and imperative to help investors and policymakers adopt more effective measures, which will ensure them to maximize profit. We construct VAR, DCC-GARCH and Copula-CoVaR models, and study the spillover effect between the green bond market and traditional bond market from the three perspectives of mean spillover, volatility spillover and extreme risk spillover using the data on daily closing prices of green bond market and traditional bond market indices. The research findings of this paper are as follows: (1) There are three spillover effects of mean value, volatility and extreme risk among the green bond market, corporate bond market, enterprise bond market and conventional bond market. (2) From the perspective of mean spillover between markets, only the mean spillover between the conventional bond market and the green bond market is bidirectional, and there is the profoundest impact of spillover from the green bond market to the conventional bond market. (3) As far as the volatility spillover between markets is concerned, the volatility spillover between the three traditional bond market and the green bond markets are all positive. The volatility spillover between the conventional bond market and the green bond market is the largest, which is particularly obvious in the first half of 2018 and the first half of 2020. (4) In terms of inter-market extreme risk spillover, the risk spillover between the green bond market and the traditional bond market is positive. The green bond market contributes more to the risk spillover of the enterprise bond market, and it has a time-varying risk spillover effect on the traditional bond market.