无论做出怎样的选择都将是一笔不菲的金额。不仅如此，可持续发展面临的诸多挑战不仅对于个人和社区来说十分紧迫，对于全球来说也是刻不容缓，例如应对气候变化挑战。我们不能坐等“合理”碳价的出现，不能坐等技术成本降到足够低，更不能坐等民众自发地改变生活方式。我们必须快速地筹集大量资金，否则未来我们所付出的努力将会越来越难以抵挡大自然的威力。

传统上，为“公益”资金的来源就是动用公共资金，例如为可再生能源发放补贴。但是，我们现在讨论的是上万亿美元而不是数十亿美元，公共资金根本无法实现这一目标。即便是中国这样国家层面公共融资状况相对较好的国家，中国人民银行预计未来年均绿色融资需求将达到3500亿美元，而公共资金也只能满足15%。

因此，我们需要将大量私营部门的资金导入正确的方向。全球金融与资本市场管理的金融资产超过300万亿美元，主要是银行借贷、证券交易所股票和债券。目前，这些资金很少用于可持续发展融资，并且大多数资金所资助的项目无论是从环境意义，还是从社会意义上来说都是都不可持续的，既有重污染的煤炭开发，也有效率低下的建筑施工，还有水资源使用量极大并且碳强度极高的农业活动。的确，多数私营资金所投资的都是获利丰厚的短期交易，而没有真正触及实体经济，但却造成大量亟需的资金从生产效率更高的领域流失。

与此同时，民众作为全球金融资产的拥有者也面临着危机。目前金融市场处于低利率时代，这就意味着他们目前的储蓄在未来很可能无法提供安全的购买力。金融体系以往所扮演的有效连接资金所有者和使用者的角色未能得到充分发挥，不仅可能危及人们世代积累的财富，还有可能威胁全球经济繁荣的基础，即一个健康、包容、可持续的实体经济。

因此，中国人民银行副行长易纲10月8日在利马IMF/世界银行年会上的发言开启了有关金融与资本市场未来的政策辩论的新篇章。他宣布中国将在其G20轮值主席国任内推动实行新的绿色金融工作流程。此举表明中国不仅认识到了绿色发展以及气候问题的重要性，更预示着全球需要建立适合21世纪发展的金融体系。

易纲的发言代表着历史演进的正确方向。随着越来越多中央银行家、金融监管者以及来自会计事务所和证券交易所等金融标准制定者采取切实措施将可持续发展纳入金融市场的改革与发展过程之中，一场“革命”正在“悄然”发生。这正是联合国环境规划署为期两年的“可持续金融体系设计选项研究”所得出的核心结论，并在项目最终报告《我们想要的金融体系》中得到体现。

发展中国家正在这一领域发挥着领导作用。印度尼西亚金融服务管理局制定了为期十年的“可持续金融路线图”，包括能力建设、信息、财务和监管等多方面的措施。巴西的中央银行对本国银行业实行了环境风险监管措施，肯尼亚中央银行积极引入移动支付服务，作为提升金融包容性的手段。南非调整其养老金监管措施，以保证受托人将社会与环境因素考虑在内。中国人民银行针对建设中国绿色金融体系提出了一系列监管、法律、财务和机制方面的建议，并将作为“十三五”计划的一部分实施推广。

一些发达国家也采取了行动。比如英格兰银行，还有近期要求金融机构报告其碳足迹和气候风险的法国监管机构。大约三十家证券交易所已在《可持续证券交易所倡议》上签字，承诺将要求公司上市前汇报可持续发展情况。标普评级已将气候风险纳入主权信用评级标准，旨在保证绿色债券发行业务持续稳健发展的指南也已经出台。

金融体系与健康或者能源体系一样，都有一个首要的目标——那就是保证资金流动支持具有包容性的可持续的发展。虽然一些银行或者保险公司已做出表率，通过社会和环境责任行动展现了他们的领导力，但真正的责任在于政策制定者、监管者和标准制定者，他们必须通过完善金融体系规则，从而保证实现更为重要的目标。资助可持续发展的需求是无可置疑的——不管我们是为了促进各自国家的发展，还是为了采取国际化行动应对气候变化等全球性挑战。幸运的是，眼下正是采取行动，将金融体系更好地与这些需求协调起来的大好时机。

译者：子明

谢孟哲，全球绿色发展研究所高级研究员、国际可持续发展研究所高级顾问。

Finance for sustainable development involves big numbers. Shortfalls in financing needed by developing countries to meet their sustainable development goals add up to US$2.5 trillion annually, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Most estimates suggest US$6 trillion a year is needed for infrastructure investment, which should ideally be ‘greened’ by having low carbon goals factored in.

Whatever number one chooses, the main point is that it's a lot of money. Making matters worse is that many sustainable development challenges are urgent for individuals and communities. We cannot wait for the `right` carbon prices, for technology costs to fall enough, or for citizens to voluntarily change their ways. We need to move money at scale, quickly, or the forces of nature will make future efforts increasingly pointless.

Conventionally, the way to finance “public works” is to use public finance – such as subsidising renewables. Yet because we are talking trillions not billions, there is simply not enough public finance to do the job. Even in China, where the state of public finances is comparatively good, at least at the national level, the People`s Bank of China estimates that public finance can only meet about 15% of green financing needs of over US$350 billion annually going forward.

Private finance is needed, and lots of it, flowing in the right direction. Global financial and capital markets currently handle over US$300 trillion in financial assets, mainly through bank lending and shares valued via stock exchanges and bonds. Today, too little of these funds are being used to finance sustainable development, and quite a lot are financing environmentally and socially unsustainable, economic activities, from dirty coal to inefficient buildings, and water and carbon-intensive agriculture. Indeed, much private finance is used for profitable short-term trading, not really touching the real economy, yet dragging much needed funds away from more productive uses.

At the same time, the owners of the world`s financial assets – citizens – are also in crisis. Today`s low interest rates mean that their savings are unlikely to deliver tomorrow`s buying power and security. The financial system is failing in its historic role of effectively connecting the owners and users of financial wealth, threatening both to impoverish generations of savers and damage the basis on which economic wealth is created, a healthy, inclusive, sustainable real economy.

So when People`s Bank of China`s Deputy Governor Yi Gang took the stage at the IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings in Lima on the 8th October, he opened a new chapter in policy debate about the future of financial and capital markets. Announcing a new workstream on green finance under China`s G20 presidency, he was not simply recognising the importance of environmental issues, but signalling the need to develop a global financial system fit for the 21st century.

Yi Gang`s comments are on the right side of history. A “quiet revolution” is taking place as growing numbers of central bankers and financial regulators take practical steps to integrate sustainable development considerations into financial market reform. These are the core findings of the UN’s two-year Inquiry into Design Options for a Sustainable Financial System, outlined in its final report, The Financial System We Want.

Developing countries have led this movement. The Indonesian Financial Services Authority has set out a ten-year “sustainable finance roadmap” covering capabilities, information, and fiscal and regulatory measures for the future. Meanwhile, Brazil`s central bank has imposed environmental risk regulations on the country`s banking community, and Kenya`s central bank has championed the introduction of mobile based payment services as a means to increase financial inclusion.

Pricing risk

South Africa has adjusted its pensions regulations to ensure that trustees take social and environmental considerations into account. The People`s Bank of China has made a series of regulatory, legal, fiscal and institutional recommendations for ‘greening’ China`s financial system that will be taken forward as part of the 13th Five Year Plan.

Some developed countries have also joined this leadership group. The Bank of England is a case in point, as is France`s recent policy measures requiring financial institutions to report on their carbon footprint and climate risks. Almost thirty stock exchanges have signed up to the Sustainable Stock Exchange Initiative committed to advancing sustainable development reporting in listing requirements. At the same time, Standard & Poor’s Ratings have incorporated climate risks into sovereign credit ratings, and guidelines have emerged to ensure continued robust growth in the issuance of green bonds.

Favourable conditions? 

The financial sector, like the health or energy sectors, has an over-arching purpose – in this case, to ensure that financial flows support inclusive, sustainable prosperity. While exemplary banks or insurance companies show their leadership through social and environmental responsibility, the real task lies with policy makers, regulators and standard-setters in shaping the rules of the financial system in ways that ensures that its broader purpose can be realised.

The need to finance sustainable development is indisputable – regardless of whether this is understood through the lens of national development priorities or the need for international action in addressing global challenges, such as climate change. Fortunately, the conditions are now right for taking action.