Basically, I have a hard time with „green“ and „brown“. For me, the decisive factor is that there is considerable potential to reduce emissions in all industries – including agriculture.

It must be made clear: Agriculture will continue to make reductions, but it can never be climate neutral. If Germany is aiming for climate neutrality in 2045, other sectors will have to contribute more.

Yes, and agriculture is actually doing very well compared to other sectors. It is one of the few sectors that has so far met its targets in terms of emissions reduction.

If you look at animal husbandry: We are actively promoting renovations, but there has been far too little investment in this area so far. In order to finance the investments that would ensure greater animal welfare for pigs, for example, you have to achieve higher prices with pig farming – or this service, which is also a service for society, has to be rewarded in some other way.

Farmers' principal banks prepare sustainability ratings for their customers. Rentenbank provides support by, for example, developing a simple set of questions to make it easier for farmers to achieve a higher rating class. We are endeavouring to help ensure that agriculture is not cut off from credit supply, or only offered poor conditions, simply because it cannot become climate neutral. However, we cannot do this alone. We need support from other stakeholders.

Our primary task as a development bank is to incentivise people to invest – in the conversion of barns, in the soil-conserving cultivation of arable land, in the regional production of food, but also in farm succession and business start-ups. This focus has proven its worth over the last 75 years. And this incentivisation works very well.

Because the greenhouse gas footprint is becoming increasingly important when granting loans, we want to motivate farmers to look at their climate change footprint. For this reason, we will subsidise the preparation of emissions footprints with our own funds. And for farmers who draw up a carbon footprint and commit to a verifiable reduction path, we are also offering the prospect of an interest rate adjustment. The two independent subsidy programmes are to be launched over the course of the next year.

We are talking about a one-off payment for the preparation of the climate balance sheet. And for investment loans based on a reduction pathway, we are then talking about additional reductions in interest conditions.

My feeling is that agricultural businesses, as conservative as they may seem at first glance, have already reinvented themselves three times, while others are still thinking about it. The pressure to transform is more direct than in other sectors.

As the German Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) already constitutes state aid from the perspective of EU state aid law, no further aid may be granted through the financing of wind farms, for example. The 12-month Euribor is used as the reference interest rate. Due to an inverted yield curve, so the comparatively high interest rates for short-term loans, the reference value is also correspondingly high. This makes subsidised loans unattractive for EEG financing.

The interest rate landscape must normalise, and that is exactly what is happening at the moment. The reference rate has already fallen. We will also see the effect in new business.

For this year, we expect the volume of programme loans to be noticeably lower than in the previous year. However, the figure reflects not only the consequences of the reference interest rate, but also a weakness in investment, which we also see in many other sectors. Fortunately, we are expecting a strong November and December.

There is a lack of planning security. This is essential for investment and innovation. A classic example is barn renovations: is the investment worthwhile or not? There must be a reliable framework for this. For me, this also includes reliable purchase agreements from food retailers.

Firstly, the default rates are extremely low. We basically have no defaults. Secondly, the terms are very long. This is because it takes time for investments to amortise, especially as the operating results in agriculture – and therefore the possibilities for repayment – are low. Thirdly, there is a dependency on weather and climate and therefore considerable risks. This in turn creates high pressure to adapt. As a result, farms have to constantly scrutinise and adapt.

Our main product is the programme loan, and that will remain the case. But we are always thinking about how we can and must organise our products differently and what else we can offer.

In our fundraising, we rely on a healthy mix of strategic elements – our benchmark bonds in euros and dollars – and smaller transactions in various currencies. We always remain flexible when it comes to timing. This allows us to optimise our funding costs.

It is currently quite expensive for us to borrow money. But not just for us, but for all development banks. If we go to the market again now, we expect a higher spread than for the issues already done so far this year.

That is true. But green bonds alone do not promote ESG. Because the issuers are referring to existing assets. The green bond does not create any new business.

This is not a contradiction. Green bonds are in high demand among investors. Often, they have written certain target values into their guidelines. We fulfil this demand. At the same time, we want to communicate genuinely about green bonds. We do not want to be accused of „greenwashing“– or simply „washing“.

Investors could explain in advance which projects they are providing money for, for example for a specific transformation project, or for greater animal welfare.

The subject is difficult for public deals because we want to issue according to rules that are nailed down. This is easier for green bonds; they are an established instrument for renewable energies, for example.

That is indeed the case. We could raise funds via a private placement. I have repeatedly put forward the idea of raising money for greater animal welfare in this way. However, nothing has been finalised yet. It would be important for us to have a reliable measurement of targets.

We will report on a voluntary basis, because sustainability is an important issue for us. But of course the task is complex. I can well understand it when smaller institutions resist the effort.