Establishment of Green Financial Service System Marked by Carbon Finance

At present, national policies are inclining towards accelerating the development of the low-carbon economy and promoting China’s economic transformation and industrial optimization. As reported by the New York Times on January 9, “China is now taking the lead in Green Revolution”. The rational establishment of a green financial service system marked by carbon finance is not only an operational challenge, source of managerial pressure and social responsibility that cannot be avoided by the Chinese financial industry in this new era, but is also a driving force behind innovation, a way forward and a sound prospect. Since the investment and financing systems involved in the low-carbon economy are characterized by “Five-high Features”, with much stricter requirements with regard to capital intensiveness, technical innovation, environmental interaction, industry cooperation and national policies, the focus of the establishment of the carbon finance service system should stress the “Five-new Mechanism”, namely, the proportionality for “carbon finance” to support the economy, the gradient of “carbon finance” innovation and cultivation, the standardization of the “carbon finance” rating criteria, the internationalism of “carbon finance” risk management and the equity in the safeguard of rights and interests of “carbon finance”. I (Yan Qingmin, director of Chinese CBRC Shanghai Authority) think that there are discernible differences between conventional credit approaches and low-carbon economy approaches, and that the development of a “carbon finance” service mode calls for increases in financial innovation capacity and capacity in financial instruments; to develop a low-carbon economy, financial services must take the lead, but despite this, we should not exaggerate the role of commercial banks, and should refrain from adhering to the old practice of credit expansion at a low level; it should be realized that the leading role will be played by national development planning and the supportive role of the policies and measures of the government; we must maintain keen vigilance in the face of a serious situation in which the high risk of credit granted to high-carbon industries remains whist the risk of new loans to low-carbon industries accelerates, which should not be allowed to co-exist and mutually affect one another at the early stages in the development of the low-carbon economy; prevent and control new systematic risk and financial crisis by strengthening the standard of rational supervision and through the “Three Kinds of Awareness”, namely cooperation and mutual benefit, standardized competition and social responsibility among financial institutions; optimize the configuration of low-carbon credit resources and probe into the “low-carbon bank” service system, wherein, at present more attention should be paid to the “Five Balances”: balance among project credit and environment credit, among credit for the manufacturing industry and credit for the service industry, among production credit and consumption credit, among policy-based finance and commercial finance as well as among credit product innovation and derivative instrument innovation.

Developing low-carbon economy calls for the reform of the financial service system

Science epistemology of low-carbon economy

The low-carbon economy will have a key bearing on the development of human civilization and the future of Chinese economy. The upsurge of the low-carbon economy is not a direct result of reflection over the US financial crisis in 2008, but from the basic consensus which, in response to the global economic crisis in 2009, governments around the world have reached in respect to deterioration of climate change, sustainable development of the economy and environmental deterioration, which is a precious chance to jointly promote the development of the low-carbon economy. When reflecting on the destructive consequences to our environment and the very foundations of the sustainable development of the world economy caused by global heavy industrialization, we should recognize the reality that the major developed countries have excessively sought economic development and profit at the expense of the environment over the past 200 years. We should also praise the fact that the major developing countries including China are taking the initiative to undertake the responsibility and obligation of “emissions reduction” express understanding of the program to implement “emissions reduction” in stages, and adjust our perception by further understanding the objective laws and nature behind the development of the low-carbon economy. The low-carbon economy is not a question of the past, but something we should be doing now and in the future. The essence of the low-carbon development is the actualization of an optimal cyclical economy. The low-carbon economy will bring about innovation and drive forward the development of the Chinese economy. The development of the low-carbon economy will be the turning point in the transformation of the development mode of Chinese industry and the transformation of China’s mode of economic growth. 

The low-carbon economy is an industrial revolution based on the technical innovation of new energy resources carried out in response to environmental pollution and the heavy-industry oriented economy. Taking foreign cities as examples, more than 100 years after the Industrial Revolution began in Britain, London had become a filthy and chaotic city by the Victorian Age. However, the appearance of London had greatly changed by the early 20th century after the green construction movement; Tokyo had also experienced a similar course of events between the 1960s and 1990s. As a large energy consumer, industry accounts for about 70% of national energy consumption in China; industrial COD and sulfur dioxide emissions respectively account for 38% and 86% of total emissions nationwide; in industry, emissions and pollution from heavy chemical industries are the major concern. In rural areas, excessive nitrogenous fertilizer leads multiple “negative effects”. Agriculture has suffered from three-dimensional cross-contamination, which is destroying the environment at present and will affect food security in the future. In 2005, application of nitrogen fertilizer was more than 30 million tons, about 55 times of that in 1965. In 2007, surplus nitrogen fertilizer totaled at almost 10 million tons in China.

Five characteristics of the investment and financing demands of low-carbon economy

Developing a low-carbon economy requires establishing a corresponding, supporting and highly-efficient investment and financing system. The investment and financing demands of low-carbon economy have “Five-high” characteristics, as it is a new high-end economic model proposed by advanced countries in post industrial nations. If the current economy mainly reflects the development and fusion among industrialization, urbanization and marketization, the development conditions of low-carbon economy are far stricter along with a much larger industrial system, more complex business structure, huger capital investment and longer production cycle. In my opinion, the investment and financing system of low-carbon economy is based on “Five-high Demands”. The first is the higher demand for capital-intensive investment due to the larger demand for the average invested capital as per projects and the high starting point of the industrialized capital scale, requiring “massive” capital-intensive investment. The second is the higher demand for the technical innovation of financial instruments; since low-carbon industry depends on the support and promotion of high standard technical innovation and involves higher demands on the technology-intensive and knowledge-intensive requirements, the standard financial market cannot meet the up-grade financial demands, it is necessary to accelerate the development of structural financial instruments and up-grade financial market. The third is the higher demand for the investment and financing cooperation among industries. Because of longer industrial chains, more sub-industries, more complicated market boundaries of the low-carbon industry, its operation in respect to investment and financing requires not only traditional corporate investment and financing cooperation and projects investment and financing cooperation, but also thinking on massive industries and investment and financing cooperation among multiple industries as well as the breakthroughs and promotions from the high-end investment and financing instruments such as syndicated loans, industry cooperation funds and government investment fund. The fourth is the higher demand for the interaction in the financial market with broader operational boundaries and more detailed dimensions in transactions. In contrast to more apparent characteristics of interim, periodicity and stability in the aspects of investment, financing and fund raising relating to the requirements of the industrialized economy on the financial market, the low-carbon economy has much more stricter requirements on the openness, normalization and system of the financial market, with higher expectations and stronger dependence to overcome financial market segmentation and the obstacles with regard to investment and financing. The fifth is the higher demand for policy-based financial support and guidelines for investment and financing approaches. Characterized by unique operation modes such as massive input, longer cycle, high-technology and growth-based, the low-carbon economy requires not only preferential duties and financial support from governments at all level, but also aid and support from policy-based finance.

Since the low-carbon economy is a difficult but optimal choice for development, the establishment of the investment and financing system for low-carbon industry will be a progressive process and the transformation from the high-carbon investment and financing system to the low-carbon investment and financing system will be a long-process. It should be noted that low-carbon economy is a goal and direction for the transformation of economic growth, and is not yet a growth mode holding a dominant position, nor will it be the only growth mode in the near future; as an emerging sunrise industry, the development system of low-carbon industry is still under construction, and its investment and financing system is far from mature due to impacts and restraints from the level of economic development and other factors.

Innovation of low-carbon finance should not be overly dependent on bank credit

Financial services should be first movers in the development of the low-carbon economy; yet, the low-carbon economy should not be based on simple financial services or the primary financial market. To assume the heavy responsibility of both growth and environmental protection, the financial industry should take the initiative to adjust financial development modes and to transform financial growth modes. The credit role of the commercial banks should not be exaggerated in the establishment of the low-carbon financial service system; the current situation and the actual level of the industrial structure in China’s economy must be addressed; we must maintain keen vigilance in the face of a serious situation in which the high risk of credit granted to high-carbon industries remains whist the risk of new loans to low-carbon industries accelerates, which should not be allowed to co-exist and mutually affect one another at the early stages in the development of the low-carbon economy. 

Keystones for establishment of “carbon finance” service system

The low-carbon economy and low-carbon finance can bring out the best in each other. It is generally agreed that the low-carbon economy has an urgent demand for financial services, and is characterized by relevance of finance and financial dependence; some experts consider financial services as the key in the development of low-carbon industry. However, it should be pointed out that, as a new national policy approach for the major objective of promoting the transformation of economic growth approaches, the aid and support to the development of low-carbon economy from financial industry should not simply regarded as the practice and implantation of social responsibility by financial industry or passive work in carrying out national development programs; we must be fully aware that the low-carbon economy is first a huge business opportunity, which will provide the financial industry outpouring opportunities for transaction service and a increasingly expanding space for financial innovation. At present, what we are facing is not the issue of “Do and Don’t”, but the issue of “Ability and Inability” and the adoption of “which pattern” and the choice of “which way” and how to “implement” it. Despite its longer investment cycle of low-carbon industry, the low-carbon economy is not a one-sided burden or cost in financial development; the low-carbon economy has good prospects for development, it is an important historic opportunity for the financial industry to serve the low-carbon economy, and an important guarantee for the financial industry to seek long term and sustainable development. I think that the orientation of low-carbon economy development should be based on “three-in-one combination” method of policy support, market mechanism and financial instruments. The financial industry should either serve national policy and strategy to develop low-carbon economy in a timely, vigorous and complete way, or continuously probe into new ways for financial development and new approaches for financial growth under the conditions of market integration and financial globalization.

Establishment of “carbon finance” service system requires promoting “Three Levels”. The first is to promote the technical capacity of financial instruments and management level of market risks. The “carbon finance” service system refers to an advanced service system for financial market transactions and services comprised of the following factors and conditions: new financial management mode and transaction system represented by carbon currency, a package of transaction products designed based on various carbon emission indexes and indexes for environmental change (such as climate change); the transaction instruments for carbon options and futures including direct fund-raising, investment and financing instruments in the capital market such as low-carbon securities, low-carbon stock and low-carbon bonds; and the financial service channels such as low-carbon loans and low-carbon insurance. Unlike traditional financial products, there are stricter restrictions in regard to transaction scale, instrument requirements, service function level and risk rating with regard to low-carbon financial products, which can be confirmed by the number of participant banks in Equator Principles, whose number in 2003 was an initial ten, and is no more than seventy now. The second is to promote awareness of the financial system to serve industry upgrading and the national situation. The primary targets of the “carbon finance” service system should be the low-carbon industry, green industry and emerging industries such as new energy resources, environmental protection and energy conservation, biotechnology and new materials and therefore, emphases should be laid on the awareness of the overall situation that “carbon finance serves the new strategic industries”. The organic combination of “carbon finance” and “carbon capital” is the only way leading to development of low-carbon industry. The third is to promote open-minded thinking and internationalized interaction in the financial market. “Carbon finance” should not just work behind closed doors, but should be open to the outside. As one of the few countries rich in “carbon finance” resources, China should have a say in the carbon finance market and should have pricing authority for the carbon finance market. In the 19th century, the dominant factor of pricing in the international monetary system for energy resources was “Coal & Pound”, in the 20th century it was “Oil & Dollar”, and in the 21st century, China should play a key role in the “Carbon Currency” system.

Changing flexibly from “high-carbon banks” to “low-carbon banks”

The China Banking Regulatory Commission takes a clear stand to support the innovation of low-carbon finance services. In December 2009, at the “2009 China Finance Forum”, Mr. Liu Mingkang, CBRC president, pointed out that the banking industry should become the “Practitioner” to spread low-carbon notions and the “Innovator” of low-carbon finance services. In recent years, the CBRC has issued a series of policies such as the Guiding Opinions on the Credit Work for Energy Conservation and Emission Reduction and the Guidelines for Risk Management by Commercial Banks of Loans Extended for Mergers and Acquisitions to urge the banking industry and financial institutions to carry out carefully the policies of macro regulation and control of the State, to perform the social responsibilities of the financial industry, to commit to innovation of credit service mechanisms, to develop “green credit” business, to reduce credit to high energy-consuming and high-emission industries, to support the adjustment, optimization and upgrading of industrial structure. According to data from Statistical Department of the CBRC, in the first three quarters of 2009, the growth rate of RMB loans in high energy-consuming industries from major commercial banks was much lower than the overall average rate of loan increase for the period in question, demonstrating a clear shift in credit structure.

At present, “carbon banking” has only just emerged. Internationally and strictly speaking, “carbon banking” began on June 10, 2003, when ten multinational banks announced the Equator Principles (of which Mizuho Corporate Bank, Japan, Asia, was one of the ten initiators). In October 2008, the Industrial Bank (33.08,-0.70,-2.07%) became the first bank to join in the Equator Principles in China; in December 2009, the first “project to adopt the Principles” of IB was launched, and IB has signed agreements with the IFC to take the lead in the SMBs Utility-Based Energy Efficiency Finance Program; as of the first half of 2009, the total loans granted have reached RMB 4.2 billion Yuan. In January this year, the Shanghai Pudong Development Bank (19.49,-0.19,-0.97%) released the Propose for Establishment of Low-carbon Bank. In terms of loans, China Minsheng Banking Corp. Ltd (7.16,-0.07,-0.97%) innovatively launched CDM-based financing projects of energy conservation and emission reduction. In regard to financial management products, The Bank of China (4.09,-0.02,-0.49%) and Shenzhen Development Bank initially launched financial management tied to emissions trading. On the whole, though the banking industry in our country has taken an initial and important step in “low-carbon credit”, we must aware that there is a great difference between “low-carbon credit” and a “low-carbon bank”.

There are “Four reasons” why the role of commercial banks should not be exaggerated or overrated: the first is that the industrial credit structure dominated by credit for heavy chemical industry is economically rigid. At the Copenhagen conference, the Chinese Government further announced the carbon emission peak years of “2030 to 2040”, based on the efficiency aim to reduce emissions by 40%-45% formerly put forward. That is to say, as the GDP grows, the emission quantity will increase too. What we should pay more attention to is that as a developing country, the adjustment and transformation from a high-carbon credit structure to a low-carbon credit structure requires not only adjusting the project structure, enterprise structure, structure of cost and revenue and risk expectations, but also, and the more as the key, the reform of the industrial system, financial industry system and investment and financing system, which, in regard to regulations and the change in notions, requires time and a gradual process. The second is that the iron law of due diligence in the banking and financial industries determines that the scale and ratio of low-carbon credit can not be accomplished overnight. Commercial banks are not venture capital enterprises. “Three major standards” of security, profitability and fluidity have determined that banks prefer and depend on sustainable production systems and patterns of consumption, as well as mature development modes and growth patterns. The third is that the time is not yet her for the formation of legal norms and the detailed regulations with regard to low-carbon finance, and there are no mandatory requirements. Since the Kyoto Protocol has no mandatory emissions constraints on China, China is just a seller in the carbon transaction market while the Copenhagen Accord has no internationally Legal binding force either. Therefore, integrated laws and regulations for domestic banks to participate in carbon transactions need to be determined and the standardized detailed rules need to be studied. The fourth is that “low-carbon finance” cannot run its own show. The “low-carbon credit” is just the beginning of the “low-carbon bank” while the “low-carbon bank” is just of the leading roles or an assistant director, and can’t take the place of low-carbon currency, low-carbon securities, low-carbon insurance, low-carbon funds and low-carbon derivative instruments. Only when the service system of “low-carbon finance” is basically sound can the service system of “low-carbon finance” comprehensively and efficiently exert its role of credit optimization and industry upgrading.

The key for low-carbon finance market lies in the development planning and platform construction

Development of the low-carbon economy should firstly depend on government policy, coordination and planning and international cooperation, and should not rush into mass action (take wind power as a example), wherein, the question of how to deal with the distribution problem of international “carbon emission” share and how to deal with the problems in respect to import and export structures and trade relations in the international carbon emission products are the “two major political issues” that are unavoidable in the development of the low-carbon economy. When establishing the low-carbon finance market system, we must pay attention to the compilation of governmental development programs and the construction of the basic platform of the market, and should have a definite objective in view, step by step. For the low-carbon finance market, basic tasks and coordination work in regard to policy guidance, market standards and regional division of work must be adeptly performed. 

Institutional and international environments for development of low-carbon finance market

An international agreement to limit emissions is difficult to arrive at. The critical fact lies in the control of international discourse in “low-carbon politics”. For nearly 20 years since 1992, action has been slow in reaching an agreement on the distribution of global carbon emission share, with numerous disputes arising from it. In 1992, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where the Convention on Climate Change was signed. In 1995, based on the Berlin Consensus, representatives from 149 countries and regions adopted the famous Kyoto Protocol with the purpose of restraining greenhouse gas emissions from developed countries at the UN Tokyo Climate Change Framework Convention 3rd Conference of the Parties in December 1997. In 2002, the Equator Principles came into being, committed to establishing industry standards for green finance. In 2009, the Copenhagen Conference further deepened the global consensus, but failed to reach an agreement with international legal binding force. It is obvious that the vying of international interests is affecting the development of the low-carbon economy.

In fact, behind the policy competition among the governments all over the world lies economic interests and trade profits. What we firstly and primarily hear is the voices of the governments from the developed countries: such as the Stern Review directed by UK Government, or in the “nitty-gritty that can’t be covered” reported by Al Gore, Former US Vice President, or in Climate Change 2007, the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Some developed countries such as the US and those from EU try to take the lead in putting forward the “green economy” program, on the one hand trying to resolve the problem of lack of drive for economic growth, and on the other hand to control international discourse in “low-carbon politics” and further to seek a dominant position in “low-carbon economy”. The governments of the US and France try to fully implement the policy of “carbon tax” and some of the developed countries requested that “carbon tariffs” be levied on some developing countries, including China, what they mean to do is to contest for the commanding position in international trade of “emission rights” and the pricing right for international “carbon finance” market.

To greatly promote the construction of “low-carbon bank” credit service system in China

Firstly, the carbon emission transaction market both in China and in the rest of the world has vast room for development. According to the World Bank, the total amount of global carbon transactions in 2008 reached USD 126 billion, ten times more than that in 2005. In June 2009, New Energy Finance Ltd, UK, issued a report predicting that the global carbon transaction market will reach USD 3.5 trillion by 2020, becoming the top market in the world and exceeding the oil market. Since 2001, the energy intensity in China (the energy consumption per unit GDP) and the carbon intensity (carbon emission per unit GDP) has increased fast. From 2000 to 2005, the increase of energy consumption and carbon emission in China greatly surpassed economic growth. At present, China’s carbon emissions rank second in the world, accounting for one third of the global market. According to calculations by the World Bank, if the developed countries accomplish the emission reduction target of 5 billion tons by 2012, at least 3 billion tons herein will be purchased from China. According to the forecast in the Medium-long Item Program of Energy-saving compiled by NDRC, during the "Eleventh Five-Year" period, the total amount of investment in energy-saving in China will reach more than RMB 600 billion Yuan. As the most potential market for carbon emission reduction and the largest supplier of CDM projects, China will provide 1,500 million to 2,000 million tons of CO2 CER in each year, which means the transaction amount of carbon emission reduction in each year can reach USD 2.25 billion. 

Secondly, learn from international experience and allow commercial banks to try out “carbon finance” derivative instruments. Compared with the global scale of “carbon emission”, the market scale of international “carbon transaction” is relatively small, but nevertheless has great potential. In addition to the high cost of “low-carbon technology” and high criteria of “low-carbon industry”, the lack of “carbon capital” reserves and lag of the development of “carbon finance” is another objective reason. At present, four global Carbon Exchanges trade in developed countries such as the EU, UK, US and Australia, and the transnational banks that participate in carbon trading are Standard Chartered Bank, HSBC and Bank of America. Therefore, we should learn from the experiences of developed countries in the aspects of system design, regional planning and platform construction, so as to reasonably lay out the carbon emission exchanges in China and develop distinctive and hierarchical regional trading markets in a relatively concentrative distributional manner. We must be wary of the phenomenon in which many regions are competing to map out “carbon emission exchanges” currently (the same as the way many cities compete to plan financial centers in recent years), and should not be too excessive. Now, cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Guangzhou and Xuzhou have begun transactions of carbon emission projects and services of green financial projects via carbon exchange, environment exchange, property right exchange and energy exchange or in other forms, but no united and standardized exchange center for futures contracts has been established. It is suggested that a China Concentrated Exchange Center for “Carbon Finance” Futures should be established in Pudong by dint of the national strategy of the construction of the “Two Center” and taking advantage of the World Expo in Shanghai. Some of the Chinese-funded or foreign-funded commercial banks under proper conditions may be allowed to participate in the “carbon finance” derivatives market.

Thirdly, manage “Five Balances”; optimize the configuration of the credit resources for new energy resources. The “low-carbon credit” should take the credit for new energy resources as the mainstream, where the credit for new energy resources refers to the credit for the development of alternative energy sources subject to natural energy resources and the credit for the development of the renewable energy resource, including credit for the development of solar energy and photovoltaic energy, bioenergy or ethanol, wind power, hydro power, geothermal power, nuclear energy, intelligent energy and air energy. At present, the investment in low-carbon technology in our country mainly relies on government allocations and policy-based loans as well as international loans or donations, without stable and mature governmental investment and financing systems. In addition, the credit and service for low-carbon projects offered by financial institutions has only been around for a few years. However, it is not to be neglected that, as for the status of the market, the projects to support emissions reduction and the additional construction of relevant infrastructure need more capital, and represent huge market space for potential credit. The banking industry and financial institutions should strengthen the study, research, use for reference, application and exploration with regard to the Equator Principles (put forward based on the financial service standards of the World Bank and IFC in 2002) and the Panda Standard (put forward by Beijing Environment Exchange in 2009), and actively support credit for low-carbon industry and credit for low-carbon enterprises. At present, to optimize the configuration of credit resources, it necessary to pay attention to “five balances” of “the balance between project credit and environment credit”, “the balance between credit for manufacturing industry and service industry”, “the balance between production credit and consumption credit”, “the balance between policy-based finance and commercial finance” and “the balance between innovation of credit products and the innovation of derivative instruments”. We must actively innovate for low-carbon credit products, for example, with pollution discharge licenses held as collateral to finance environmental friendly enterprises, spontaneously offer the service of financial settlement for CDM projects. We must learn from the advanced practices of leading international banks in the aspect of services in “carbon finance” market and “carbon bank”, and actively probe into the innovative system for “carbon credit”.

Fourthly, the “low-carbon credit” should match the keynote and implementation pace of regulation and control in respect to the energy economy in our country. Now, the National Energy Commission has been set up, the macro-control framework for low-carbon economy is coming into being and the reform of resource tax is about to be launched. According to the data from SDRC, of the RMB 4 trillion Yuan investment program launched in response to the financial crisis, RMB 210 billion Yuan has been invested in projects of energy conservation and emission reduction as well as ecology construction; RMB 370 billion Yuan has been used for independent innovation and the adjustment of industry structure. In January 2010, the National Energy Administration indicated that the authorities concerned had reached a consensus with regard to the reformation of resource tax from collected by quantity to by ad valorem, and the new plan for reform of resource tax will be launched in due time. The existing Provisional Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Resource Tax issued on January 1, 1994 stipulates that resource tax is mainly levied by quantity, which covers a relatively narrow imposing scope and cannot reflect the fluctuations in resource prices; since the burden of taxation of the enterprises is too small to urge awareness to save resources, this has weakened the policy intention to impose resource tax. In the case of imposition by ad valorem, the burden of taxation of the large consumer of resources will be increased greatly. Banking institutions should be active to investigate the new policies on energy and economy and the new keynotes about macro regulation and control, set up the strategic thinking of “low-carbon credit”, strengthen surveys and assess how credit security will be impacted when the costs of resource-consumption enterprises rise and credit withdraws from "two high and one-resource" industries, so as to conduct credit supply scientifically.

Fifthly, strengthen the construction of “low-carbon bank’s” infrastructure, to which various measures should be taken simultaneously in the aspects of talent cultivation, system configuration, network construction, and product research and development, centering on software Infrastructure and hardware infrastructure, of which talent are the most important. Commercial banks should formulate medium-to-long-range programs for talent cultivation, adopt the learning-by-doing system to train, import, retain, exchange and use talent so as to lay a solid foundation for the construction of “low-carbon banks”. Continuously enrich the connotations of green financial culture, try our best to combine the culture of banking institutions, the culture of financial industry, the culture of national credit and the culture of international practice into one.

Sixthly, the “low-carbon economy” requires new scientifically refined regulation and control. Since low-carbon finance is a new development in the financial industry, there are problems present that deserve our constant research, exploration, practice and summary. Financial regulators should broaden their macroscopic horizons, upgrade service concepts, transform regulatory approaches and probe into new thinking about regulatory innovative services. For this purpose, only by strengthening the study of new things in relation to the economy, finance and market to grasp dynamic variation both in macroscopic and microcosmic regulatory environments can we meet the regulatory quality requirements in the age of the “low-carbon economy”.(Source: China Finance)