这是用户在 2025-1-21 16:24 为 https://app.immersivetranslate.com/pdf-pro/3a9c6f1c-8162-41ce-b4f4-8a8231c689ed 保存的双语快照页面，由 沉浸式翻译 提供双语支持。了解如何保存？

Carbon Market Participation and Green Finance: A MultiChannel Analysis of Environmental Markets
碳市场参与与绿色金融：环境市场的多渠道分析

1. Introduction  1. 引言

1.1 Research Motivation and Background
1.1 研究动机和背景

The development of carbon markets marks a pivotal shift in environmental policy, transitioning from traditional command-and-control regulation to innovative market-based mechanisms. Since its establishment in 2005, the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) has become the world’s largest carbon market, covering approximately 45 % 45 % 45%45 \% of EU greenhouse gas emissions (Ellerman et al., 2016). This approach has introduced both financial constraints and opportunities for firms, fundamentally reshaping their operational and financial decision-making processes.
碳市场的发展标志着环境政策的关键转变，从传统的命令和控制监管转变为创新的市场机制。自 2005 年成立以来，欧盟排放交易体系 （EU ETS） 已成为世界上最大的碳市场，涵盖了大约 45 % 45 % 45%45 \% 欧盟的温室气体排放量（Ellerman et al.， 2016）。这种方法为公司带来了财务限制和机遇，从根本上改变了他们的运营和财务决策流程。
In parallel with the growth of carbon markets, the green finance sector has witnessed remarkable expansion, particularly in the green bond market. Global green bond issuance surged beyond $ 500 $ 500 $500\$ 500 billion in 2021 (Climate Bonds Initiative, 2022), reflecting growing investor interest in sustainable finance. These two developments-carbon markets and green finance-represent significant components of environmental policy and corporate finance strategies.
在碳市场增长的同时，绿色金融领域也出现了显著扩张，尤其是在绿色债券市场。2021 年，全球绿色债券发行量激增至 $ 500 $ 500 $500\$ 500 10 亿以上（气候债券倡议组织，2022 年），反映出投资者对可持续金融的兴趣日益浓厚。碳市场和绿色金融这两个发展是环境政策和公司融资战略的重要组成部分。
Despite their interconnected potential, the interaction between carbon markets and green finance remains underexplored. Previous studies have often analyzed these markets in isolation, focusing on either carbon market efficiency (Hintermann et al., 2016) or green bond pricing mechanisms (Baker et al., 2018). This compartmentalized approach neglects the possible synergies between mandatory environmental compliance (e.g., carbon markets) and voluntary green financing instruments (e.g., green bonds). Addressing this gap is essential to understanding how participation in carbon markets influences firms’ access to green finance and shapes their broader financial strategies.
尽管碳市场和绿色金融之间具有相互关联的潜力，但它们之间的互动仍未得到充分探索。以前的研究往往孤立地分析这些市场，关注碳市场效率（Hintermann et al.， 2016）或绿色债券定价机制（Baker et al.， 2018）。这种划分的方法忽视了强制性环境合规（例如碳市场）和自愿绿色融资工具（例如绿色债券）之间可能的协同作用。解决这一差距对于了解参与碳市场如何影响公司获得绿色金融并塑造其更广泛的财务战略至关重要。

1.2 Significance and Innovation
1.2 意义和创新

This research aims to bridge the gap in understanding by developing a comprehensive framework that integrates mandatory carbon markets with voluntary green finance mechanisms. Building on recent studies, such as Sautner et al. (2022) on climate risks and capital structure, we extend traditional capital structure theories to account for environmental compliance obligations and their implications for financing decisions. This novel theoretical extension provides critical insights into how firms navigate the dual challenges of environmental compliance and financial optimization.
本研究旨在通过开发一个将强制性碳市场与自愿绿色金融机制相结合的综合框架来弥合理解差距。基于 Sautner 等人（2022 年）关于气候风险和资本结构的最新研究，我们扩展了传统的资本结构理论，以解释环境合规义务及其对融资决策的影响。这种新颖的理论扩展为公司如何应对环境合规和财务优化的双重挑战提供了重要见解。
From an empirical perspective, this study introduces innovative metrics to measure cross-market reputation effects, expanding the literature on environmental market design (Fezzi and Bunn, 2007). These metrics enable the quantification of previously unobservable spillover effects between environmental markets, offering fresh perspectives on market efficiency and information transmission. Additionally, leveraging quasi-experimental variations in carbon market regulations strengthens the causal inference, addressing the endogeneity concerns that have limited prior research.
从实证的角度来看，本研究引入了创新指标来衡量跨市场声誉效应，扩展了环境市场设计的文献（Fezzi 和 Bunn，2007 年）。这些指标能够量化环境市场之间以前无法观察到的溢出效应，为市场效率和信息传输提供新的视角。此外，利用碳市场法规的准实验性变化加强了因果推理，解决了限制先前研究的内生性问题。

1.3 Three Core Research Questions
1.3 三个核心研究问题

This study addresses three interconnected research questions that reflect the interaction between carbon markets and green finance:
本研究解决了反映碳市场与绿色金融之间相互作用的三个相互关联的研究问题：
  1. Capital Structure and Environmental Compliance:
    资本结构与环境合规：
  • How does mandatory participation in carbon markets affect firms’ capital structure decisions and financing costs?
    强制参与碳市场如何影响公司的资本结构决策和融资成本？
  • What are the differential impacts on firms with varying carbon market positions (e.g., net buyers vs. net sellers)?
    对碳市场地位不同的公司（例如，净买家与净卖家）有哪些不同的影响？

2. Market Learning and Green Bond Dynamics:
2. 市场学习和绿色债券动态：

  • How does a firm’s carbon market position influence its success in green bond issuance and pricing?
    公司的碳市场地位如何影响其在绿色债券发行和定价方面的成功？
  • What roles do reputation effects and market learning play in subsequent green bond issuances?
    声誉效应和市场学习在随后的绿色债券发行中起什么作用？
  1. Environmental Market Integration:
    环境市场整合：
  • To what extent does participation in carbon markets create information spillovers that affect firms’ access to green financing?
    参与碳市场在多大程度上产生了影响企业获得绿色融资的信息溢出效应？
  • How do these spillovers evolve with market maturity and regulatory changes?
    这些溢出效应如何随着市场成熟和监管变化而演变？

2. Literature Review  2. 文献综述

2.1 Theoretical Framework
2.1 理论框架

2.1.1 Carbon Markets and Firm Behaviour
2.1.1 碳市场和企业行为

Carbon markets have fundamentally altered the operational and financial strategies of regulated firms. Empirical studies demonstrate that firms respond to carbon pricing through technological innovation, process optimization, and strategic financial adjustments. For instance, Calel and Dechezleprêtre (2016) find that carbon markets stimulate significant investments in low-carbon technologies, while Petrick and Wagner (2014) highlight operational shifts aimed at reducing emissions. Financially, firms employ hedging strategies to manage carbon price volatility, as documented by Oestreich and Tsiakas (2015).
碳市场从根本上改变了受监管公司的运营和财务战略。实证研究表明，企业通过技术创新、流程优化和战略性财务调整来应对碳定价。例如，Calel 和 Dechezleprêtre （2016） 发现碳市场刺激了对低碳技术的大量投资，而 Petrick 和 Wagner （2014） 强调了旨在减少排放的运营转变。在财务上，公司采用对冲策略来管理碳价格波动，如 Oestreich 和 Tsiakas （2015） 所记录的那样。
The design of carbon markets also plays a critical role in shaping firm behavior. Martin et al. (2016) show that mechanisms such as allowance allocation methods and market stability measures significantly influence compliance strategies. These findings underscore the importance of market design in achieving environmental objectives while minimizing disruptions to firms’ financial stability.
碳市场的设计在塑造企业行为方面也起着关键作用。Martin et al. （2016） 表明，配额分配方法和市场稳定措施等机制会显著影响合规策略。这些发现强调了市场设计在实现环境目标同时最大限度地减少对公司财务稳定的破坏方面的重要性。

2.1.2 Green Finance Development
2.1.2 绿色金融发展

The rise of green finance, particularly the green bond market, has garnered substantial scholarly interest. Tang and Zhang (2020) analyze its rapid growth, noting the increasing volume of issuance and the diversification of issuers and investors. Green bonds are often associated with a “green premium,” where issuers benefit from lower borrowing costs due to investor demand for sustainable assets (Baker et al., 2018).
绿色金融的兴起，尤其是绿色债券市场，已经引起了学术界的极大兴趣。Tang 和 Zhang （2020） 分析了其快速增长，注意到发行量的增加以及发行人和投资者的多元化。绿色债券通常与“绿色溢价”有关，由于投资者对可持续资产的需求，发行人受益于较低的借贷成本（Baker et al.， 2018）。
The role of certification and transparency in green finance is increasingly emphasized. Flammer (2021) demonstrates that third-party certification improves both green bond pricing and market access, reducing information asymmetry. Additionally, Marquis et al. (2016) and Kapraun and Scheins (2019) identify the importance of reporting standards, market liquidity, and institutional ownership in shaping green bond market efficiency and pricing dynamics.
认证和透明度在绿色金融中的作用越来越受到强调。Flammer （2021） 表明，第三方认证可以提高绿色债券定价和市场准入，减少信息不对称。此外，Marquis 等人（2016 年）和 Kapraun 和 Scheins （2019 年）确定了报告标准、市场流动性和机构所有权在塑造绿色债券市场效率和定价动态方面的重要性。

2.1.3 Capital Structure and Environmental Risk
2.1.3 资本结构与环境风险

Environmental factors are now integral to firms’ capital structure decisions. Sautner et al. (2022) show that climate risk exposure influences financing choices, while Bolton and Kacperczyk (2021) provide evidence linking carbon emissions to portfolio allocation decisions by investors. Despite these advancements, research on the interaction between environmental performance and capital structure remains mixed. For instance, Chava (2014) finds that firms with poor environmental profiles face higher financing costs, while Zerbib (2019) identifies a modest but significant green bond premium. These findings highlight the need for further exploration of how environmental compliance and reputation affect financing strategies.
环境因素现在是公司资本结构决策不可或缺的一部分。Sautner 等人（2022 年）表明，气候风险敞口会影响融资选择，而 Bolton 和 Kacperczyk（2021 年）提供了将碳排放与投资者的投资组合分配决策联系起来的证据。尽管取得了这些进步，但关于环境绩效和资本结构之间相互作用的研究仍然喜忧参半。例如，Chava （2014） 发现环境状况不佳的公司面临更高的融资成本，而 Zerbib （2019） 发现绿色债券溢价适中但显着。这些发现凸显了进一步探索环境合规性和声誉如何影响融资策略的必要性。

2.2 Hypothesis Development
2.2 假设发展

H1: Carbon Market Compliance Costs and Capital Structure Adjustments
H1：碳市场合规成本和资本结构调整

Participation in carbon markets imposes significant compliance costs on firms, influencing their financial strategies and capital structure decisions. Firms face direct costs such as carbon allowance purchases and investments in emission reduction technologies, which necessitate adjustments in their leverage ratios.
参与碳市场会给公司带来巨大的合规成本，影响其财务战略和资本结构决策。公司面临直接成本，例如购买碳配额和投资减排技术，这需要调整其杠杆率。

H1a: Compliance Costs and Leverage
H1a：合规成本和杠杆

Firms with higher compliance costs are expected to increase their leverage to finance these obligations. Building on the extended trade-off theory, compliance costs introduce new tax shield benefits while increasing financial distress risks, pushing firms to optimize their debt-equity balance. This relationship is expressed as:
预计合规成本较高的公司将增加其为这些义务融资的杠杆。基于扩展权衡理论，合规成本引入了新的税收保护优势，同时增加了财务困境风险，促使公司优化其债务-股本平衡。这种关系表示为：
Leverage { i , t } = f ( { i , t } = f _({i,t})=f(:}_{\{i, t\}}=f\left(\right. ComplianceCosts { i , t } { i , t } _({i,t})_{\{i, t\}}, CashFlow { i , t } { i , t } _({i,t})_{\{i, t\}}, MarketUncertainty { t } { t } _({t})_{\{t\}}, Controls { i , t } ) { i , t } {:_({i,t}))\left._{\{i, t\}}\right)
利用 { i , t } = f ( { i , t } = f _({i,t})=f(:}_{\{i, t\}}=f\left(\right. ComplianceCosts { i , t } { i , t } _({i,t})_{\{i, t\}} ， CashFlow { i , t } { i , t } _({i,t})_{\{i, t\}} ， MarketUncertainty { t } { t } _({t})_{\{t\}} ， Controls { i , t } ) { i , t } {:_({i,t}))\left._{\{i, t\}}\right)

H1b: Carbon Position and Leverage Differences
H1b：碳位置和杠杆率差异

Net sellers in carbon markets, who generate additional revenue from the sale of allowances, are expected to maintain lower leverage ratios compared to net buyers. The modified pecking order theory suggests that environmental cash flows reduce reliance on external financing, providing a sustainable internal funding source. This can be modeled as:
与净买家相比，碳市场中通过出售配额获得额外收入的净卖家预计将保持较低的杠杆率。修正的啄食顺序理论表明，环境现金流减少了对外部融资的依赖，提供了可持续的内部资金来源。这可以建模为：
Δ Leverage { i , t } = f ( CarbonPosition { i , t } , CreditRevenue { i , t } , MarketLiquidit { t } , Controls { i , t } ) Δ  Leverage  { i , t } = f  CarbonPosition  { i , t } ,  CreditRevenue  { i , t } ,  MarketLiquidit  { t } ,  Controls  { i , t } Delta" Leverage "_({i,t})=f(" CarbonPosition "_({i,t})," CreditRevenue "_({i,t})," MarketLiquidit "_({t})," Controls "_({i,t}))\Delta \text { Leverage }_{\{i, t\}}=f\left(\text { CarbonPosition }_{\{i, t\}}, \text { CreditRevenue }_{\{i, t\}}, \text { MarketLiquidit }_{\{t\}}, \text { Controls }_{\{i, t\}}\right)

H2: Environmental Reputation and Green Bond Market Dynamics
H2：环境声誉和绿色债券市场动态

Carbon market performance influences a firm’s reputation, which subsequently impacts its behavior and outcomes in green bond markets.
碳市场表现会影响公司的声誉，进而影响其在绿色债券市场的行为和结果。

H2a: Initial Market Access and Pricing
H2a：初始市场准入和定价

Net sellers in carbon markets benefit from lower green bond spreads due to their superior environmental performance. Based on signaling theory, participation in carbon markets serves as a credible signal of environmental competence, reducing information asymmetry for investors. The relationship is expressed as:
由于绿色债券的环保表现优异，碳市场的净卖家受益于较低的绿色债券利差。根据信号理论，参与碳市场是环境能力的可靠信号，减少了投资者的信息不对称。这种关系表示为：
GBSpread \(_{\{i, 1\}}=\boldsymbol{f}\left(\right.\) CarbonPosition \(_{\{i\}}\), EnvPerformance \(_{\{i\}}\), MarketConditions \(_{\{t\}}\), Controls \(\left._{\{i\}}\right)\)

H2b: Dynamic Learning and Reputation Accumulation
H2b：动态学习和声誉积累

Firms with consistent participation in carbon and green bond markets accumulate environmental reputation capital, resulting in enhanced pricing advantages over time. This relationship reflects reputation accumulation and market learning dynamics, where repeated engagement builds trust and reduces uncertainty. The model can be expressed as:
持续参与碳和绿色债券市场的公司积累了环境声誉资本，随着时间的推移，定价优势会增强。这种关系反映了声誉积累和市场学习动态，其中反复参与可以建立信任并减少不确定性。该模型可以表示为：
Δ G B S p r e a d d i , n } = f ( Experience { i , n } , MarketLearning { t } , NetworkEffects { i , t } , Controls { i , t } ) Δ G B S p r e a d d i , n } = f  Experience  { i , n } ,  MarketLearning  { t } ,  NetworkEffects  { i , t } ,  Controls  { i , t } Delta GBSpreaddi,n}=f(" Experience "_({i,n})," MarketLearning "_({t})," NetworkEffects "_({i,t})," Controls "_({i,t}))\Delta G B S p r e a d ~ d i, n\}=f\left(\text { Experience }_{\{i, n\}}, \text { MarketLearning }_{\{t\}}, \text { NetworkEffects }{ }_{\{i, t\}}, \text { Controls }_{\{i, t\}}\right)

H3: Cross-Market Integration and Information Spillovers
H3：跨市场整合和信息溢出

The interaction between carbon markets and green finance markets facilitates information spillovers, enhancing firms’ market access and efficiency.
碳市场和绿色金融市场之间的互动促进了信息溢出，提高了企业的市场准入和效率。

H3a: Information Spillovers and Green Bond Access
H3a：信息溢出和绿色债券准入

Firms with strong carbon market reputations experience improved access to green bond markets and reduced certification costs. Cross-market information transmission theory posits that verified environmental performance in carbon markets serves as implicit certification in green finance. The relationship is modeled as:
在碳市场享有良好声誉的公司可以更好地进入绿色债券市场，并降低认证成本。跨市场信息传递理论认为，碳市场中经过验证的环境绩效是绿色金融的隐性认证。该关系建模为：
MarketAccess { i , t } = f ( CarbonReputation { i , t − 1 } , MarketDepth { t } , InstitutionalOwnership { i , t } , Controls { i , t } )  MarketAccess  { i , t } = f  CarbonReputation  { i , t − 1 } ,  MarketDepth  { t } ,  InstitutionalOwnership  { i , t } ,  Controls  { i , t } {:[" MarketAccess "_({i,t})],[=f(" CarbonReputation "_({i,t-1})," MarketDepth "_({t})," InstitutionalOwnership "_({i,t})," Controls "_({i,t}))]:}\begin{aligned} & \text { MarketAccess }_{\{i, t\}} \\ & =\boldsymbol{f}\left(\text { CarbonReputation }_{\{i, t-1\}}, \text { MarketDepth }_{\{t\}}, \text { InstitutionalOwnership }_{\{i, t\}}, \text { Controls }_{\{i, t\}}\right) \end{aligned}

H3b: Regulatory Complementarity and Spillover Amplification
H3b：调节互补性和溢出放大