2026/2027 BA-BPOLV2601U The Macrofinance of the Green Transition
| English Title | |
| The Macrofinance of the Green Transition |
Course information |
|
| Language | English |
| Course ECTS | 7.5 ECTS |
| Type | Elective |
| Level | Bachelor |
| Duration | One Semester |
| Start time of the course | Autumn, Autumn |
| Timetable | Course schedule will be posted at calendar.cbs.dk |
| Min. participants | 30 |
| Max. participants | 60 |
| Study board |
Study Board for Global Relations
|
| Programme | BSc in International Business and Politics |
| Course coordinator | |
|
|
| Main academic disciplines | |
|
|
| Teaching methods | |
|
|
| Last updated on 17-02-2026 | |
Relevant links |
| Learning objectives | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
At the end of the course, the student will be
able to:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Course prerequisites | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Macroeconomics, Microeconomics | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Examination | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Course content, structure and pedagogical approach | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This course examines the macro-financial foundations of the green transition, situating climate change within political economy and macroeconomics. The shift away from fossil fuels raises profound questions about how states, central banks, and financial markets can mobilize and allocate capital for decarbonization while safeguarding stability and growth. Students will explore how ecological constraints disrupt conventional macroeconomic assumptions about growth, inflation, and investment, and how new forms of state–market relations are emerging in response. A central theme is the contested politics of financing. The course analyzes the rise of the “derisking state” and the Wall Street Consensus, where public institutions are reconfigured to guarantee returns for private investors in green infrastructure. This approach is contrasted with more dirigiste strategies such as those seen in China and elsewhere in which governments directly mobilize credit creation and industrial policy to steer structural transformation. The tension between these models highlights different pathways through which macro-financial regimes can support or hinder the ecological transition. The course introduces students to debates over fiscal space, monetary policy, and macroprudential regulation in the Anthropocene. Key topics include carbon pricing, stranded assets, transition risks, financing green industrial policy, and the distributive consequences of green finance. Empirical cases from Europe, the United States, Brazil, India and China illustrate how diverse macro-financial architectures condition opportunities for green industrialization and reveal the influence of financial lobbies and fossil incumbents. By integrating ecological realities into the study of macroeconomics and political economy, the course equips students to critically assess institutional choices, financial architectures, and power struggles that will shape the future of the global green transition. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research-based teaching | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CBS’ programmes and teaching are research-based. The following
types of research-based knowledge and research-like activities are
included in this course:
Research-based knowledge
Research-like activities
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description of the teaching methods | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Case-based teaching
Comparative cases (EU, US, China) and corporate case studies (multinationals, energy firms, financial institutions) illustrate how different macro-financial architectures create opportunities and risks for business strategy. Simulations and scenario exercises Role-play or scenario planning workshops where students act as central bankers, corporate strategists, or policymakers facing shocks such as abrupt carbon pricing or a green bond market crash. These highlight trade-offs and negotiation dynamics. Debate and structured controversy Students prepare and defend positions (e.g. “Should central banks buy green bonds?” or “Are carbon markets better than public investment?”). This fosters critical engagement with competing schools of thought. Applied projects and policy labs Teams develop short strategy or policy briefs that apply macro-financial insights to a chosen sector (renewables, transport, finance). Deliverables are concise, professional-style outputs rather than academic essays. Guest speakers and practitioner input Inviting experts from finance ministries, central banks, or green investment funds connects theory with practice and shows students the career relevance of these debates. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Feedback during the teaching period | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Peer review workshops
Students exchange draft memos or briefs in small groups, using a structured rubric. Each student gives and receives feedback, which encourages active learning and reflection without requiring you to mark every draft. Live debriefs after tasks After a simulation, debate, or in-class case exercise, the class reflects together on what worked and what didn’t. You guide the discussion, but the students surface the feedback themselves. Model answer walk-throughs After a short assignment or mini-exam, you present a model answer (or several strong anonymized student answers). Students compare their own work against it and identify gaps. Collective feedback summaries Instead of line-by-line comments, you review a sample of submissions and then give a general “what went well / what to improve” presentation to the whole class. Feedback circles In groups of 4–5, students present their takeaways from an assignment, while peers offer constructive input. The group then synthesizes two key lessons to share with the class. Self-assessment checklists Provide students with a rubric aligned to learning objectives. Before submitting, they score themselves and discuss with peers, which makes feedback part of the learning process rather than only your responsibility. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student workload | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Expected literature | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Clapp, Jennifer, and Eric Helleiner. "Reflections on the IPE of green finance." Competition & Change (2025): 10245294251324780.
Kedward, Katie, Daniela Gabor, and Josh Ryan-Collins. "Carrots with (out) sticks: credit policy and the limits of green central banking." Review of International Political Economy 31.5 (2024): 1593-1617.
van’t Klooster, Jens. "Technocratic Keynesianism: a paradigm shift without legislative change." New political economy 27.5 (2022): 771-787.
Gabor, Daniela, and Benjamin Braun. "Green macrofinancial regimes." Review of international political economy 32.3 (2025): 542-568.
Helleiner, Eric, Monica DiLeo, and Jens van't Klooster. "Financial technocrats as competitive regime creators: The founding and design of the Network for Greening the Financial System." Regulation & Governance 19.3 (2025): 901-916.
Li, Xuan, and Cornel Ban. "Financing technological innovation in China: neo-developmental financial statecraft through government guidance funds." Review of International Political Economy (2025): 1-31.
Kim, Sung-Young, Hao Tan, and Elizabeth Thurbon. "Developmental Environmentalism: Green Growth in East Asia." OUP (2025). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||