Author
Abstract
This article explores two primary questions: first, whether the issuance of green bonds contributes to environmental protection, particularly regarding their performance after the adoption of net-zero emission policies; and second, whether issuers of green bonds can have economic benefits. Using the Difference-in-Differences (DID) model to analyze green and conventional bonds issued from 2013 to 2023, the study finds no significant correlation between green bond issuance and CO2 emissions following net-zero adoption. Nevertheless, our findings are important and deserve attention as they indicate that the carbon reduction policies have not exerted sufficient pressure on bond issuers to reduce emissions. At the same time, however, a closer examination of issuing entities reveals that those issuing only green bonds tend to have higher ESG ratings, lower CO2 emissions, and lower financing costs. This suggests that such issuers achieve substantial environmental benefits and economic advantages. In contrast, entities issuing both conventional and green bonds do not demonstrate the same environmental benefits. This finding raises concerns about potential greenwashing, suggesting that entities issuing both green and conventional bonds may engage in practices that contradict environmental protection while presenting their activities as environmentally friendly through green bonds. The study also highlights that the impact of bond features on ESG scores and CO2 emissions varies significantly across different types of issuers. Finally, the paper recommends that policymakers strengthen carbon reduction policies, establish mechanisms to prevent greenwashing, and integrate CO2 emissions and ESG factors into assessment systems. Additionally, it calls for special attention to the carbon emissions of entities in low- and middle-income countries, as well as those in the manufacturing sector, to support the healthy development of green finance.
Suggested Citation
Di Zhou & Alexios Kythreotis, 2024.
"Why issue green bonds? Examining their dual impact on environmental protection and economic benefits,"
Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
Handle:
RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-04318-1
DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-04318-1
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-04318-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.