Abstract: Green credit is increasingly recognized for its role in supporting low-carbon industry development and facilitating the achievement of carbon neutrality goals. For banks, green credit functions more as a policy-driven financing mechanism than a commercial opportunity. Banks primarily rely on fiscal subsidies, targeted reserve requirements and other policy benefits to achieve profitability while meeting regulatory requirements. To sustain the growth of green credit, enhancing the effectiveness of fiscal subsidies, improving the quality of green credit, and strengthening incentives for enterprise green production are critical. At the core of these efforts is the need to refine the interest rate pricing mechanism for green credit. Currently, green credit interest rate pricing typically follows two approaches: one based on retrospective evaluations of enterprise environmental performance for interest rate incentives, and the other focused on the sustainability of the green credit business, aiming to balance the risks and returns of green projects.
   This paper develops a financing model for manufacturers facing stochastic green demand, considering a traditional manufacturer transitioning to green production by upgrading conventional products to low-carbon emission products and selling them to environmentally-conscious consumers. The success of the green transformation depends on the level of green investment. To alleviate capital constraints in the production process, manufacturers seek green loans from banks. A three-stage process is assumed: in the first stage, manufacturers make early green investments to meet the green financing threshold, while banks disclose their green credit pricing mechanisms; in the second stage, manufacturers obtain green credit and set production levels to maximize profits; in the third stage, manufacturers sell products, generating revenue to repay loan principal and interest. If revenue is insufficient to cover loan payments, it is assumed that the manufacturer will go bankrupt, and the bank will recover all revenue. From the bank’s perspective, two basic pricing models are identified: the emission cap-fixed interest rate model and the risk control-floating interest rate model. First, by analyzing and summarizing the decision-making characteristics and differences between financing parties in these two pricing models, the paper proposes a new emission cap-floating rate pricing model. Then, through a numerical simulation, the effects of incentive policies such as interest rate subsidies and risk compensation on carbon emissions, bank interest rates and corporate profits in different pricing models are explored.
   The results show that in the two basic pricing models: (1)there are optimal values for enterprise output and green investment decisions, with optimal output positively correlated with initial green investment; (2)in the emission cap-fixed interest rate model, banks can constrain corporate carbon reduction by lowering the emission threshold and interest rate, while in the risk control-floating interest rate model, banks adjust the interest rate to balance project returns and principal risk; (3)in the new emission cap-floating rate pricing model, it can simultaneously control corporate carbon emissions and business risks; (4)under risk compensation policies, increasing compensation ratios can effectively manage green credit business risks, reduce carbon emissions, and increase corporate profits.

Key words: green credit, pricing mechanisms, interest rate subsidies, risk compensation

摘要： “双碳”目标引领下,银行需要同时实现信贷对企业减碳的激励和业务可持续。本文构建需求扰动下报童制造商融资模型,提炼出限排量-固定利率、控风险-浮动利率两类基础定价模式,探究融资双方的决策特征及不同定价模式的差异。研究发现:(1)企业产量、绿色投资决策均存在最优值,且最优产量与初始绿色投资正相关;(2)银行在限排量-固定利率定价模式中通过降低排放阈值和利率均会使企业受到减碳约束;在控风险-浮动利率定价模式中通过调节利率以平衡项目收益与本金风险。进而,提出限排量-浮动利率的新定价模式,以同时控制企业碳排放和业务风险。为了保证融资企业利润,分别考虑利率补贴和风险补偿两种激励政策,发现新定价模式均表现出较好特性。尤其在风险补偿政策下,随着补偿比例增加,新定价模式将可能同时控制绿色信贷业务风险、降低碳排放以及提升企业利润。

关键词: 绿色信贷, 定价机制, 利率补贴, 风险补偿