碳市场建设在债券市场的溢出效应:债券信用利差的视角

The Spillover Effects of China’s Carbon Market Development on the Bond Market: A Perspective from Bond Credit Spreads

胡珺,李倩,宋献中

2026 第 52 卷 第 07 期 页码 94-108

DOI: 10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.20260523.201

PDF全文下载 HTML全文

语音预告

摘要

碳排放权交易市场将企业碳排放权内化为有价生产要素,这可能对资本市场投资者的企业风险预期和资源配置产生重要影响。文章以2010—2024年我国公开发行企业债、公司债和中期票据的A股上市公司为样本,从债券信用利差视角考察了碳市场建设如何影响债券市场的信用风险定价。研究发现,碳市场建设在债券市场上产生了显著的溢出效应,碳市场控排企业的债券信用利差平均下降了约13.66%。区分债券类型后的结果表明,碳市场对公司债券信用利差的影响是非对称的,绿色低碳类债券的利差显著降低,其他类债券的利差则出现了显著增加,但绿色低碳债券利差的降低幅度明显高于其他债券的增加程度。机制检验表明,碳市场激励约束下的企业转型收益预期提升是公司债券信用利差总体降低的重要原因。异质性检验发现,当碳市场初始碳配额需支付对价或非履约主体交易更为活跃、企业所在地区或行业的碳风险暴露程度更高以及投资者对企业碳风险更为关注时,碳市场建设对公司债券信用利差的降低作用会更为明显。文章揭示了碳市场建设作用于债券市场定价的逻辑与机制,有助于从环保制度视角为提升我国资本市场的定价效率提供经验与启示。

Since 2011, China has established pilot carbon emission trading schemes (ETS), commonly known as “carbon markets”, across eight provincial and municipal regions. In 2021, a unified national carbon market was officially launched, initially covering the power sector. As a pivotal institutional innovation in climate governance, carbon markets convert corporate carbon emission rights into a priced production factor, which can substantially reshape investor risk perceptions and resource allocation decisions in capital markets. Existing literature predominantly focuses on risk spillovers and asset pricing dynamics in the stock market, while there is still little systematic theoretical elaboration and empirical evidence regarding the spillover effects of carbon markets on the bond market. Therefore, this paper investigates the impact of carbon market implementation on credit risk pricing in the bond market, with a specific focus on corporate bond credit spreads.

Taking China’s A-share listed companies that publicly issued enterprise bonds, corporate bonds, and medium-term notes between 2010 and 2024 as samples, this paper constructs a quasi-natural experiment using the staggered rollout of regional carbon markets. The results show that carbon market implementation significantly reduces credit spreads for carbon-regulated firms. Subsample analysis based on bond categories documents an asymmetric pricing effect: Carbon markets significantly narrow the spreads of green and low-carbon bonds while widening those of conventional bonds, and the reduction in the spreads of green bonds exceeds the increase in the spreads of conventional bonds. Mechanism testing reveals that enhanced expectations of corporate low-carbon transformation benefits, driven by carbon markets’ dual incentive and constraint mechanisms, serve as the primary channel underlying the overall decline in corporate bond credit spreads. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that the effect is stronger when the initial carbon quota requires payment of consideration or non-compliant participants are more active, carbon risk exposure at the regional and industry levels is higher, and investor attention to corporate carbon risks is greater.

This paper makes the following marginal contributions: First, it sheds light on the cross-market spillover effects of China’s carbon market development by linking carbon regulation to bond pricing dynamics from the credit spread perspective. Second, it expands the set of determinants of corporate bond credit spreads and extends the theoretical framework explaining how macro market-oriented environmental policies shape bond investors’ pricing behaviors. Third, it provides empirical evidence for policymakers to optimize carbon market frameworks and maximize the positive environmental and economic outcomes of this market-oriented climate governance mechanism.

参考文献

1 郭玥. 政府创新补助的信号传递机制与企业创新[J]. 中国工业经济, 2018, (9): 98−116. DOI:10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2018.09.016
5 李治国, 王杰. 中国碳排放权交易的空间减排效应: 准自然实验与政策溢出[J]. 中国人口•资源与环境, 2021, (1): 26−36. DOI:10.12062/cpre.20200907
7 林伯强. 碳中和进程中的中国经济高质量增长[J]. 经济研究, 2022, (1): 56−71.
8 林晚发, 李殊琦. 成本粘性、信用评级与债券信用利差[J]. 北京工商大学学报(社会科学版), 2018, (3): 33−41. DOI:10.12085/j.issn.1009-6116.2018.03.004
9 潘爱玲, 张启浩, 李广鹏. 中小投资者环境关注会影响重污染企业绿色并购吗[J]. 南开管理评论, 2024, (7): 135−147. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2024.07.014
10 任胜钢, 郑晶晶, 刘东华, 等. 排污权交易机制是否提高了企业全要素生产率——来自中国上市公司的证据[J]. 中国工业经济, 2019, (5): 5−23. DOI:10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2019.05.001
13 王营, 冯佳浩. 绿色债券促进企业绿色创新研究[J]. 金融研究, 2022, (6): 171−188.
16 徐佳, 崔静波. 低碳城市和企业绿色技术创新[J]. 中国工业经济, 2020, (12): 178−196. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-480X.2020.12.016
17 徐思, 潘昕彤, 林晚发. “一带一路”倡议与公司债信用利差[J]. 金融研究, 2022, (2): 135−152.
18 许文立, 孙磊. 市场激励型环境规制与能源消费结构转型——来自中国碳排放权交易试点的经验证据[J]. 数量经济技术经济研究, 2023, (7): 133−155. DOI:10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.2023.07.001
19 游家兴. R2的复活——股价同步性研究评述与展望[J]. 管理科学学报, 2017, (3): 63−79. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-9807.2017.03.005
20 余明桂, 安剑锋, 郑馨睿, 等. 全国统一大市场建设与金融高质量发展——基于打破债券市场分割的研究[J]. 管理世界, 2024, (3): 1−15. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2024.03.001
21 钟覃琳, 陆正飞. 资本市场开放能提高股价信息含量吗?——基于“沪港通”效应的实证检验[J]. 管理世界, 2018, (1): 169−179. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2018.01.014
22 Bai J, Ru H. Carbon emissions trading and environmental protection: International evidence[J]. Management Science, 2024, 70(7): 4593−4603. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.2023.03143
23 Bao J, Pan J, Wang J. The illiquidity of corporate bonds[J]. The Journal of Finance, 2011, 66(3): 911−946. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2011.01655.x
24 Bolton P, Kacperczyk M. Do investors care about carbon risk?[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2021, 142(2): 517−549. DOI:10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.05.008
25 Ding Y, Xiong W, Zhang J F. Issuance overpricing of China's corporate debt securities[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2022, 144(1): 328−346. DOI:10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.06.010
26 Hu J, Zhang S Y, Wang L, et al. Carbon emission trading scheme, investors’ attention, and earnings response coefficients[J]. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 2024, 97: 102085. DOI:10.1016/j.intfin.2024.102085
27 Ji Q, Xia T S, Liu F, et al. The information spillover between carbon price and power sector returns: Evidence from the major European electricity companies[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 208: 1178−1187. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.167
28 Pástor Ľ, Stambaugh R F, Taylor L A. Sustainable investing in equilibrium[J]. Journal of financial economics, 2021, 142(2): 550−571. DOI:10.1016/j.jfineco.2020.12.011
29 Tombe T, Winter J. Environmental policy and misallocation: The productivity effect of intensity standards[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2015, 72: 137−163. DOI:10.1016/j.jeem.2015.06.002
30 Zerbib O D. Is there a green bond premium? The yield differential between green and conventional bonds[J]. Journal of Banking and Finance, 2016, 98: 39−60.

数据公开

标题文件大小下载
数据及程序代码 624.6 KB