Search Climate Insights Directory

The Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) sustainable finance market grew significantly between 2019 and 2021, with total GSS issuance reaching USD 48.6 billion by June 2021. Green bonds remain the dominant instrument, though social and sustainability bonds have expanded rapidly, partly driven by COVID-19 relief efforts. Chile, Brazil, and Mexico are the primary markets, together accounting for 77% of all GSS issuance. While energy is the most funded sector, there is increasing diversification into low-carbon transport and sustainable agriculture. The region is also seeing a rise in sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs) and the development of national green taxonomies to standardize climate-aligned investments.

The Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) sustainable finance market grew significantly between 2019 and 2021, with total VSS emissions reaching USD 48.6 billion by June 2021. Chile, Brazil, and Mexico dominate the region, accounting for 77% of all VSS emissions. Green bonds are the largest segment (USD 30.2 billion), primarily driven by energy projects and sovereign issuances in Chile. The report also highlights the rise of social and sustainable bonds, the emergence of sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs), and the ongoing development of national green taxonomies in countries like Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and the Dominican Republic.

The report examines how green bonds and transition finance can support South Africa's shift from a coal-dependent energy system to a low-carbon economy. It highlights the critical role of the two largest emitters, Eskom and Sasol, and proposes various financial models, including sovereign green bonds and asset-backed securities, to attract international capital while managing the social implications of a 'Just Transition'.

The Chinese green bond market issued USD 44bn in 2020, a 21% decrease from 2019, partly due to the pandemic and a shift toward social-themed 'Pandemic Prevention and Control' bonds. While China remains a global leader, a significant portion of its issuance (USD 20.2bn) is not aligned with Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI) standards, primarily because local regulations allow proceeds to fund general working capital. However, the 2020 Green Bond Catalogue consultation draft marked a shift toward international alignment by removing 'clean coal' projects. Non-financial corporates, led by Beijing Jingneng Clean Energy, are becoming more prominent issuers, and there is a substantial pool of unlabelled climate-aligned debt, particularly in the transport sector, that presents refinancing opportunities.

The North American GSS debt market reached USD 311bn by Q1 2021, dominated by the US and primarily driven by green-labelled instruments. While the US is the largest single-country source of GSS debt, the market is heavily concentrated in agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and municipal bonds, with limited participation from the real economy's heavy-emitting sectors. Canada's market is smaller but characterized by larger average deal sizes and a strong focus on hydropower. Both nations are seeing a shift toward more ambitious climate targets and enhanced disclosure requirements, though the US lags in post-issuance reporting quality compared to Canada.

The ASEAN sustainable finance market reached a record high of USD 12.8bn in GSS bond and loan issuance in 2020. Singapore leads the region in volume, particularly through green loans for real estate, while Indonesia and Thailand show strong growth driven by sovereign issuances. The market is increasingly diversifying into sustainability-linked instruments and social bonds, although the latter remained less active in 2020. The report highlights the critical role of government support, the development of regional and national taxonomies, and the influence of Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) in scaling green infrastructure.

The Nordic GSS bond market reached a cumulative volume of USD 88.2bn by the end of 2020, with green bonds accounting for 96% of this total. Sweden is the regional leader, contributing half of the green bond volume and issuing the first Nordic sovereign green bond in September 2020. The market is characterized by strong public sector participation and a high prevalence of low-carbon building projects. External review coverage is exceptionally high, with 99% of cumulative green bond volume reviewed, primarily through Second Party Opinions (SPOs).

The global sustainable debt market reached USD 1.7 trillion by the end of 2020, with USD 700 billion issued during the year. While green bonds remain the largest segment, social and sustainability bonds saw dramatic growth in 2020, largely driven by pandemic-related funding. The European Union has emerged as a global leader, integrating GSS bonds into its climate neutrality goals for 2050 and developing comprehensive taxonomies and standards to ensure market integrity.

The Japanese green bond market grew by a third in 2020, reaching a cumulative issuance of USD 26.15 billion. Issuance is led by financial corporates and government-backed entities, with proceeds primarily allocated to buildings, transport, and energy. The report highlights a strong record of external reviews and post-issuance reporting, while identifying significant opportunities to scale up the market through the refinancing of unlabelled climate-aligned debt, particularly in the transport sector. Additionally, it outlines Japan's policy shift toward net-zero emissions by 2050 and the resulting development of green growth strategies and ESG disclosure frameworks.

The guide outlines a structured process for building a national landscape of climate finance, moving from scoping and definition to data collection and final analysis. It emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement, the use of taxonomies to categorize climate-beneficial versus harmful flows, and the application of tools like Sankey diagrams to visualize financial flows from source to end-use. The document draws on Climate Policy Initiative's (CPI) experience in countries such as India, Indonesia, and France to provide practical examples of tracking both public and private climate finance.

The sustainable debt market in H1 2020 was characterized by a shift in composition due to the COVID-19 pandemic, with a surge in pandemic and social bonds offsetting a significant decline in green bond volumes. While green bonds historically dominated, H1 2020 saw a more even split between themes, with pandemic-related investments likely financing around half of the total sustainable debt market. The report highlights the emergence of pandemic bonds, primarily in China, and the role of supranationals in sustainability issuance. Policy-wise, it examines the 'build back better' agenda, the development of taxonomies in the EU and China, and the increasing involvement of central banks and stock exchanges in integrating climate risk into financial systems.

The document proposes a framework for 'transition labels' to distinguish genuine low-carbon transition activities from 'greenwashing'. It establishes five core principles for transition pathways: alignment with a 1.5°C trajectory (net-zero by 2050, near-half emissions by 2030), science-based targets, exclusion of carbon offsets, prioritization of technical feasibility over economic competitiveness, and a requirement for concrete metrics over vague commitments. The framework categorizes economic activities into five types: near-zero emission, zero-carbon transition, non-transitionable, temporary transitional, and stranded. It further distinguishes between entity-level transitions (supported by equity, general bonds, and sustainability-linked loans/bonds) and activity-level transitions (supported by asset-backed securities and use-of-proceeds bonds).

The Climate Bonds Initiative presents a framework to categorise economic activities based on their role in a net-zero transition and establishes five principles to ensure transition labels are scientifically credible and ambitious. It distinguishes between 'green' and 'transition' labels based on the long-term viability of the activity in a low-carbon economy.

The Climate Bonds Initiative outlines a framework to distinguish credible 'transition' activities from greenwashing, establishing five core principles for alignment with the Paris Agreement. It introduces a labeling system—distinguishing between 'Environmental Labels' for long-term low-carbon roles and 'Transition Labels' for short-to-medium term emission reductions—and categorizes economic activities based on their necessity post-2050 and their decarbonization pathways.

The Climate Bonds Initiative proposes a framework for 'transition' labels to prevent greenwashing and ensure investments align with the Paris Agreement. The framework establishes five core principles for ambitious transitions: alignment with a 1.5 degree trajectory (net zero by 2050), science-based goals, the exclusion of offsets, the prioritization of technological viability over economic competitiveness, and a requirement for operating metrics over pledges. It categorizes economic activities into five types—Near Zero, Pathway to Zero, No Pathway to Zero, Interim, and Stranded—to determine whether a 'green' or 'transition' label is appropriate. The framework is designed to be flexible, applying to both whole entities (via equity or sustainability-linked bonds) and specific activities (via use-of-proceeds bonds).

The report identifies five major barriers to climate-aligned finance: structural challenges to influencing the real economy, competitive disadvantage, varying alignment methodologies, multiple decarbonization pathways, and inadequate data. It argues that while divestment alone is insufficient, financial institutions can use levers such as sustainability-linked loans, transition finance, and collective action initiatives (e.g., Climate Action 100+, Poseidon Principles) to drive decarbonization. The document emphasizes the need for harmonized assessment methodologies, industry-informed decarbonization pathways, and standardized reporting to move the financial sector from a reactive to a proactive role in the low-carbon transition.

In 2019, China's labelled green bond market grew by 33% to USD 55.8 billion, making it the largest global source of such bonds. The market saw a shift in issuer types, with non-financial corporates becoming the largest group and the introduction of the first municipal green bond. While domestic issuance is strong, discrepancies remain between Chinese guidelines and international standards, particularly regarding the use of proceeds for general working capital and the inclusion of 'clean coal' projects. The report recommends harmonizing definitions with international standards, such as those of the EU, and increasing transparency to attract more foreign investment.

The report finds that while renewable energy investment reached USD 322 billion in 2018, it must almost triple to USD 800 billion by 2050 to meet climate goals. Investment is heavily concentrated in China, the US, and Western Europe, with a dominance of solar PV and onshore wind. The private sector provides 86% of capital, primarily through project developers. Off-grid renewables, though growing, represent less than 1% of total energy access finance, with Sub-Saharan Africa as the primary destination.

The document argues that solar PV is a financially viable option for South African businesses, capable of reducing electricity costs by approximately 15% with payback periods between 3 and 12 years. It highlights that larger systems benefit from economies of scale, with capital costs for systems over 500 kWp falling below R10k per kWp. The brief also details various financial incentives, including tax benefits (12i and 12b) and VAT deductibility, and notes that the Western Cape is a leader in implementing regulations and feed-in tariffs for Small Scale Embedded Generation (SSEG).

The report evaluates the CAPEX loan model as a way to scale rooftop solar for Indian MSMEs, who struggle with the high upfront costs of the CAPEX cash model and the bankability issues of the RESCO model. Analysis shows the CAPEX loan model can be up to 14% cheaper than the RESCO model, primarily due to accelerated depreciation benefits. However, adoption is hindered by lender disinterest—driven by perceived credit risks and high transaction costs for small projects—and a lack of awareness among MSMEs. The authors recommend implementing partial risk guarantee funds, mandatory O&M contracts, EPC performance guarantees, and standardized solar loan products to mitigate these risks and reduce costs.