Exclusive interview with Ma Jun: Cross-border green investment should become a key driver of RMB internationalization

Ask AI · How can low-interest rates on the Renminbi support green investment going global?

Cailian Press, April 1st (Reporter Zhao Yibo, Li Ting, Gao Ping) In the process of Renminbi outward investment and internationalization, green investment is becoming a powerful lever.

As co-chair of the Belt and Road Green Investment Principles (GIP) Steering Committee, and Director of the Green Finance Professional Committee of the China Finance Society, Dr. Ma Jun has long been committed to promoting international green financial cooperation such as Belt and Road green investment, and has many in-depth thoughts on the integration of green investment and Renminbi internationalization.

On March 31st, at the ICMA China Debt Capital Markets 2026 Annual Conference, Ma Jun was interviewed exclusively by Cailian Press. Ma Jun believes that the tense situation in the Middle East has heightened global concern over energy security, and the ultimate model to achieve energy security is an energy system based mainly on renewable energy. This presents a huge opportunity for China: “How to effectively use green finance and transitional finance tools to support China’s green technology, capacity, and engineering services, both domestically and in other developing countries, is very important.”

Ma Jun believes that, according to estimates by CCER, China’s green investment in Belt and Road international projects has reached 44%. The process of China’s outward investment is largely a process of helping Belt and Road partner countries transition to greener economies. Given that current Renminbi interest rates are significantly lower than US dollar rates, China’s green outward investment should increasingly use Renminbi; using Renminbi for outward green investment is expected to become an important driver for accelerating Renminbi internationalization.

Below is the dialogue:

Cailian Press Reporter: Recently, at the Belt and Road Green Investment Principles (GIP) meeting, you focused on RMB business and product innovation in cross-border green investment. May I ask, what is the outlook for using Renminbi financing tools in Belt and Road green projects?

Ma Jun: Let me give some background first. GIP is an international cooperation mechanism, currently involving nearly 50 major global financial institutions, mainly promoting green investment initially. Recently, a new phenomenon has emerged: because Renminbi financing costs are lower, more overseas entities are paying attention to Renminbi financing. For example, in the Panda Bond market, some issuers’ funding costs are 200-300 basis points lower than in the US dollar bond market, making financing in China’s bond market increasingly attractive. Many domestic banks are also providing more cross-border Renminbi project loans for Chinese enterprises going abroad, along with numerous export buyer’s credit and export factoring cases.

Another background is that Belt and Road countries are increasingly interested in China’s green technologies and capacities, as China has become a major producer of solar equipment, electric vehicles, batteries, and other green industries, with highly competitive costs. China’s mode of international cooperation in green economy mainly includes two types: one is exporting products, but China’s trade surplus has become too large, creating bottlenecks overall. The larger potential mode is outward direct investment, which involves investing in capacities like solar, wind, biomass, electric vehicles, and batteries in other countries. I recently heard from officials in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Pakistan, and others that they very much hope Chinese companies will invest.

In the investment process, I believe more should be done using Renminbi. One reason is lower costs. Additionally, once enterprises obtain Renminbi financing, they can use Renminbi to purchase Chinese technology, EPC contracting services, and pay Chinese employees. This financing mode can avoid the extra costs caused by multiple currency exchanges and exchange rate fluctuations.

There are various Renminbi financing tools supporting outward investment. One is loans, for example, Chinese enterprises obtaining low-cost Renminbi loans domestically—around 3% interest—and converting them into foreign direct equity investments through ODI. This approach should become more common. Second, issuing bonds in China’s bond markets to support overseas projects with raised Renminbi funds. We emphasize three bond markets: first, Panda Bonds, financing foreign entities, which issued about 200 billion RMB last year; second, Dim Sum Bonds, with issuance around 1.3 trillion RMB last year; and third, free trade zone offshore bonds, which are growing.

These markets have huge potential but are not yet fully utilized. There are areas for further improvement. For example, after raising Renminbi in the Panda Bond market, can the currency be more definitively exchanged into foreign currency for outbound remittance? Also, domestically, issuers generally need high credit ratings. If ratings are insufficient, how can more convenient guarantee mechanisms be arranged? Moreover, Panda Bonds, Dim Sum Bonds, and offshore bonds are not well known among many potential foreign issuers, such as in Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa, where most have not heard of them. Promotion and awareness remain significant bottlenecks, requiring Chinese large financial institutions and international banks to build a sales network.

Cailian Press Reporter: Thank you, Ma. My second question relates to transition finance, which is a very important part of your current work. What is the progress of the People’s Bank of China’s second batch of transition finance catalog? What are the difficulties in implementation?

Ma Jun: The first batch of transition catalog compiled by the PBOC covered four industries: coal power, steel, construction materials, and agriculture. The second batch includes seven industries: chemicals, shipping, non-ferrous metals, etc. Both batches are being piloted in some regions. The pilot results vary; I think Zhejiang Huzhou, one of China’s green finance reform pilot zones, has done the best. Before the official release of the local transition standards, Huzhou issued its own local implementation standards and incentives. Since enterprises need to do carbon accounting, develop transition plans, and have these plans verified by third parties—adding extra costs—who bears these costs? Without incentives, enterprises’ willingness is low. Therefore, Huzhou provides interest subsidies for transition loans. They also offer many free services, such as carbon accounting for enterprises, which are provided free to banks after completion. They also offer free transition planning templates, helping reduce costs. Overall, transition financing in Huzhou is cheaper than other types of financing, making it attractive to enterprises. Over several years, Huzhou has issued about 50 billion RMB in transition financing, far ahead of other regions. Many other places, like Hebei, Jiangsu, and Shanghai, are also making active attempts in transition finance.

Generally, in most regions, transition finance still faces several bottlenecks. First, many enterprises do not yet grasp the urgency; they have not realized that if they do not transition and remain high-emission, their future products may not sell. Second, there is a lack of guidance. Among various transition pathways, enterprises may not identify which is suitable. Many recommended technologies can reduce emissions but are too costly and lack economic benefits. How to identify technological paths that are both economically viable and effective at reducing emissions is a task for banks to guide. Banks should invest more effort and resources into this area. Third, there is a lack of incentives. The government and banks need to arrange more incentives to lower the costs of transition financing, carbon accounting, and transition planning.

Cailian Press Reporter: Thank you, Ma. Moving to a hot topic, GIP focuses on the Belt and Road. Currently, with tensions in the Middle East, how does this situation affect GIP’s work, such as research or projects? Will GIP make adjustments?

Ma Jun: In the short term, from GIP’s perspective, some specific activities may be affected. For example, we had planned to hold a large forum in the Middle East this year, but the timing is uncertain. But a broader impact is not limited to us; it’s about making every country more concerned about energy security.

My view is that the ultimate model for energy security is an energy system based mainly on renewable energy. If all energy comes from solar, wind, and hydrogen, then almost all energy can be produced domestically, with little need for imports or shipping. Achieving this requires investment in these clean energies, which involves Chinese products and technologies. This is a huge opportunity for China. How to leverage green finance and transition finance tools to support Chinese green technologies, capacities, and engineering services in China and other developing countries is very important.

I recently visited Bangladesh. The country plans to increase the share of photovoltaic power from 2% to 20% within five years, which requires large quantities of solar panels, energy storage, funds, and experienced teams—all of which China has. Combining these resources and using low-cost Renminbi funds to develop a batch of green transition projects locally seems a natural progression.

Regarding GIP’s future focus, besides continuing to promote green finance concepts and capacity building, we will more actively support the implementation of Chinese green technologies and Renminbi financing tools in Belt and Road countries, helping member institutions identify and connect these elements with application scenarios in partner countries.

(Reported by Gao Ping, Cailian Press)