Environmental integrity of green bonds: stakes, status and next steps

2 March 2018 - Climate Report - By : Ian COCHRAN, Phd / Morgane NICOL

This report presents key findings of the second work package of I4CE’s work program on green bonds, exploring the challenges and opportunities to ensure the environmental integrity the green bond market. It explores the understanding of stakes and challenges related to the environmental integrity of green bonds and
suggests potential next steps for both private and public stakeholders. First, the stakes for market actors to ensure the environmental integrity of green bonds are identified and categorized. Second, the existing approaches to defining the eligibility of ‘green’ assets are reviewed and key challenges and next steps are identified. Third, the existing approaches to external review and reporting are reviewed and key challenges and next steps are identified. The report then concludes with recommendations for policymakers and market actors to improve practice in this area.

This report transparently makes the assumption that the objective of ensuring ‘environmental integrity’ of the green bond market is to support the LCCR transition. While there may not be a full market consensus on the active contribution of the green bond market, this appears to increasingly be the principal policy-related objectives expected by a number of public, private and civil-society stakeholders. Furthermore, this is not just the case for the green bond market, but touches upon the need for ‘greening’ or ‘alignment’ of all financial assets as per Article 2.1c of the Paris Agreement.

This research program was supported by the Climate Works Foundation.

The full report and the executive summary for both reports are available below.

The results of WP 1 on Improving Contribution to the LCCR Transition are available here: Report 1. Green Bonds: Improving their contribution to the low-carbon and climate resilient transition

 

To learn more
  • 11/28/2025 Foreword of the week
    COP30: The missed turn to implementation – and the coalitions moving ahead anyway

    COP30 concluded with an agreement, proving that multilateralism is still alive. However, the results are underwhelming: no push to transition away from fossil fuels, no decision on deforestation, and mixed outcomes on adaptation metrics.  On climate finance, Belém failed to shift from ambition to implementation. Negotiations quickly drifted back to a battle on yet another high-level quantitative target. The decision to triple adaptation funding by 2035 disappointed many, with its distant time horizon, lack of baseline and non-binding wording. COP30 also missed the opportunity to engage with – and build consensus around – concrete measures outlined in the Baku to Belém roadmap to get to $1.3 trillion. Instead, it defaulted to launching new processes – a work programme on climate finance and a ministerial roundtable on the NCQG.  

  • 11/13/2025
    How solidarity levies can help bridge the climate and development finance gap

    The climate and development finance gap is large and widening, as Official Development Assistance (ODA) declines and needs multiply. With shrinking fiscal space in vulnerable countries, solidarity levies are gaining attention as a predictable source of international finance. Launched at COP28 by Barbados, France, and Kenya, the Global Solidarity Levies Task Force (GSLTF) is the main initiative in this space.

  • 11/12/2025
    Bridging the Finance Gap: Leveraging National and Subnational Public Financial Institutions for Localised Climate and Development Action

    National Public Banks (NPBs) and Subnational Public Financial Institutions (SPFIs), including development banks and agencies as well as climate and green funds at the subnational level, play an increasingly vital role in financing climate action and the just transition. While national governments provide frameworks aligned with nationally determined contributions (NDCs), actual implementation occurs largely at the subnational level, which currently lacks sufficient funding. SPFIs can work as financial intermediaries, as they not only understand local needs and have stronger ties with local governments and businesses, but also access much larger volumes of capital from more diverse sources. 

See all publications
Press contact Amélie FRITZ Head of Communication and press relations Email
Subscribe to our mailing list :
I register !
Subscribe to our newsletter
Once a week, receive all the information on climate economics
I register !
Fermer