Krasnodar, Krasnodar, Russian Federation
Krasnodar, Krasnodar, Russian Federation
Krasnodar, Krasnodar, Russian Federation
Recent climate threats and carbon regulation provide the global transformations of the financial system. Therefore, the green bond market is becoming a key indicator of the transition to a post-carbon economy. Consequently, the growth of green financing and a concurrent crisis of trust determine the relevance of the research. Those occurred as a result of fragmented regulatory frameworks, inconsistent taxonomies, and practices of greenwashing. Moreover, they threaten the resilience of the financing ecosystem. The objective of the research is a comparative analysis of regulatory models in the EU, USA, and China, as well as a diagnosis of institutional challenges in Russia and other developing economies. The research purposes are as follows: (1) analysis of the regulatory base; (2) examining the relationships between regulatory stringency and the cost of capital; (3) assessment of verification and disclosure mechanisms; (4) development of an Integral Regulatory Maturity Rating (IRMR) model; (5) recommendations for the adaptation of international best practices. The methodology involves systems and comparative analysis, case studies, expert scaling, and unique coefficients. According to the research results, stringent regulation (EU) ensures transparency but reduces flexibility; market autonomy (USA) stimulates innovation but increases information asymmetry; and centralised incentivisation (China) mobilises resources but diminishes accountability. The following critical institutional deficits were identified for Russia: a low regulatory maturity index (IRMR = 0.48), a fragmented verification infrastructure with an independence coefficient of 0.31, weak integration with international standards (0.46), and insufficient fiscal incentives. The Russian green bond market requires a comprehensive modernisation of its regulatory structure, including harmonisation of the national taxonomy, the establishment of an independent verification system, and more active participation in global sustainable finance initiatives. The practical significance of the work is in proposed development strategy for the Russian green bond market. The scientific novelty consists in an experimental maturity model with non-linear weights and the identification of a paradox: high formal maturity increases transaction costs, forming an inverse relationship between legitimacy and affordability. This research contributes to institutional economics, the theory of information asymmetry, and the political economy of sustainable finance.
green bonds; sustainable finance taxonomy; regulatory maturity; ESG verification; institutional dysfunction
1. Bachelet, M. J., Becchetti, L., & Manfredonia, S. (2019). The Green Bonds Premium Puzzle: The Role of Issuer Characteristics and Third-Party Verification. Sustainability, 2(77), 1098. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041098
2. Bolgov, I. V. Shatilin, S. P., & Disikov Yu. Yu. (2020). Assessment of the technical condition of building structures of a three-story building. Information technologies in surveying of operating buildings and structures: Informatsionnyye tekhnologii v obsledovanii ekspluatiruyemykh zdaniy i sooruzheniy: Materialy 18-oy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Novocherkassk. 22 oktyabrya 2019 goda. (pp. 94–103). Novocherkassk: OOO «Lik» (in Russian).
3. Berrou, R., Dessertine, P., & Migliorelli M. (2019). An Overview of Green Finance. The Rise of Green Finance in Europe, (6), 3–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22510-0_1
4. Deschryver, P., & de Mariz, F. (2020). What Future for the Green Bond Market? How Can Policymakers, Companies, and Investors Unlock the Potential of the Green Bond Market? Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(3), 61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13030061
5. Fatica, S., Panzica, R., & Rancan M. (2021). The Pricing of Green Bonds: Are Financial Institutions Special? Journal of Financial Stability, 54, 100873. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2021.100873
6. Almeida, M., Filkova, M., Harrison, C., & Sette, P. (2020). Green Bond European Investor Survey. Climate Bonds Initiative, 14(12), 79–76.
7. Larcker, D.F., & Watts, E.M. (2020). Where's the Greenium? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 54, 101312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2020.101312
8. Baker, M., Bergstresser, D., Serafeim, G., & Wurgler, J. (2022). The Pricing and Ownership of US Green Bonds. Annual Review of Financial Economics, 14, 415–437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-financial-111620-014802
9. Ovchinnikova, S., Sekisov, A., & Shinkareva, I. [et al.] (2020). Implementation of investment and construction projects as part of the interior image formation. Seriya konferentsiy IOP: Materialovedeniye i inzheneriya : XIII Mezhdunarodnaya nauchnaya konferentsiya "Arkhitektura i stroitelstvo 2020". Novosibirsk. 22-24 sentyabrya 2020 goda, 953, 012082. BRISTOL: Izdatelstvo IOP Publishing Ltd (in Russian).
10. Liu, N., Liu, C., Da, B., Zhang, T., & Guan, F. (2021). Dependence and Risk Spillovers between Green Bonds and Clean Energy Markets. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 123595. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123595
11. Sangiorgi, I., & Schopohl, L. (2021). Why Do Institutional Investors Buy Green Bonds: Evidence from a Survey of European Asset Managers. International Review of Financial Analysis, 75, 101738. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2021.101738
12. Makarov, I.A., & Stepanov, I.A. (2021). Carbon regulation: options and challenges for Russia. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 6: Ekonomika, (6), 3–22 (in Russian).
13. Yakovlev, I.A., Kabir, L.S., Nikulina, S.I., & Rakov, I.D. (2020). Financing Green Economic Growth: Concepts, Problems, and Approaches. Finansovyy zhurnal, (3), 9–21 (in Russian).
14. Flammer, C. (2021). Corporate Green Bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 499–516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.01.010; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/LEYIDK
15. Tang, D.Y., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Do Shareholders Benefit from Green Bonds? Journal of Corporate Finance, 61, 101427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2018.12.001
16. Gilchrist, S., & Swanson, D. (2021). Regulatory Uncertainty and Green Bond Pricing: Evidence from Global Markets. Journal of Financial Markets, 47(3), 245–268.
17. McAllister, R., Chen, L., & Kumar, A. (2022). Institutional Investors and ESG Reporting Standards: The Role of Independent Verification. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 30(4), 412–431.
18. Wang, H., & Zhang, M. (2023). Evolution of China's Green Finance System: A Comprehensive Analysis of Policy Effectiveness. China Economic Review, 76, 101–118.
19. Rodriguez-Moreno, M., & Fernandez, P. (2022). Regulatory Transmission Mechanisms in European Green Finance Markets. European Financial Management, 28(2), 387–409.
20. Simpson, J., & Cole, R. (2023). Green washing Detection: Early Warning Indicators for Sustainable Finance Markets. Journal of Business Ethics, 185(1), 123–142.
21. Leong, K., Nguyen, T., & Pham, V. (2022). Regional Cooperation in Green Bond Standardization: ASEAN Experience. Asian Economic Policy Review, 17(3), 298–315.
22. Mueller, A., & Schmidt, B. (2023). Technological Innovation and Green Project Monitoring Efficiency. Financial Innovation, 9(1), 78–95.
23. Patel, S., Kumar, R., & Johnson, M. (2022). National Taxonomies and Global Integration in Sustainable Finance. International Review of Economics & Finance, 81, 445–462.
24. Anderson, K., & Clark, T. (2023). Regulatory Models and Innovation in Green Technology Financing. Research Policy, 52(4), 801–819.
25. Yoshida, H., & Tanaka, S. (2022). Green Bond Markets Under Economic Uncertainty: Adaptive Regulatory Mechanisms. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 74, 156–173.
26. Ehlers, T., & Packer, F. (2021). Green Bond Finance and Certification. BIS Quarterly Review, September, 89–104.
27. Harrison, C., Muething, L., & Tukiainen, K. (2020). Green Bond Pricing in the Primary Market: January-June 2020. Climate Bonds Initiative Report, October, 79–86.
