The paper deals with analysis of the main features and perspectives of green bonds development. Under the investigation the European Union experience of developing and functioning the green bonds market were analysed by the authors. The authors systematised the main approaches to define green bonds. Thus, the green bonds were defined as the debt investment in which an investor loans money which borrows the funds for a defined period at a variable or fixed interest rate with purpose to raise money and finance the variety of green projects and activities. In this direction, green projects mean the all activities which connected with resources saving and environmental protection activities. According to this result, the main features, parameters and principles of green bonds were indicated by the authors. Besides, based on the European Union experience the authors allocated the main pre-requisites of developing the green bonds market in Ukraine. Moreover, the authors allocated the main players at the green bonds market. According to the European Union experience and Ukraine conditions, the attractive directions of green bonds market for investors were identified by the authors. With this purpose the authors tried to consolidate the main advantages and disadvantages of green bonds for investors. According to the results, in conclusion, the authors allocated the possible economic, social, political and environmental benefits of green bonds market for issuers with purpose to attract their attention and to develop the green bonds market in Ukraine.

Гончарова Аліна В'ячеславівна, кандидат юридичних наук, доцент, доцент кафедри цивільно-правових дисциплін та фінансового права, Навчально-науковий інститут права, Сумський державний університет

The article reveals the problems of inheritance with a foreign element. In the modern world without borders, people change their residence, own real estate, keep bank accounts, and possess other property in different countries. This cannot but have consequences for succession. This, in turn, can create some difficulties, cause disputes between the heirs, and will undoubtedly affect the costs of registration of the inheritance. Another common problem is that a will made in one country may not have legal effect in another country where it must be executed. These and many other issues could not remain unresolved at the level of the European Union. A unified approach to solving many inheritance issues was found through the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition, and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession. This provision came into effect on August 17, 2015, and applies to cases of inheritance arising after this date. Inheritance cases are formalized by one competent authority (court or other instance) in one state.

ImportanceType 2 diabetes (T2D) is the leading cause of kidney disease in the US. It is not known whether glucose-lowering medications differentially affect kidney function.ObjectiveTo evaluate kidney outcomes in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) trial comparing 4 classes of glucose-lowering medications added to metformin for glycemic management in individuals with T2D.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA randomized clinical trial was conducted at 36 sites across the US. Participants included adults with T2D for less than 10 years, a hemoglobin A1c level between 6.8% and 8.5%, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) greater than or equal to 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 who were receiving metformin treatment. A total of 5047 participants were enrolled between July 8, 2013, and August 11, 2017, and followed up for a mean of 5.0 years (range, 0-7.6 years). Data were analyzed from February 21, 2022, to March 27, 2023.InterventionsAddition of insulin glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin to metformin, with the medication combination continued until the HbA1c was greater than 7.5%; thereafter, insulin was added to maintain glycemic control.Main Outcomes and MeasuresChronic eGFR slope (change in eGFR between year 1 and trial end) and a composite kidney disease progression outcome (albuminuria, dialysis, transplant, or death due to kidney disease). Secondary outcomes included incident eGFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, 40% decrease in eGFR to less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, doubling of urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) to 30 mg/g or greater, and progression of Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes stage. Analyses were intention-to-treat.ResultsOf the 5047 participants, 3210 (63.6%) were men. Baseline characteristics were mean (SD) age 57.2 (10.0) years; HbA1c 7.5% (0.5%); diabetes duration, 4.2 (2.7) years; body mass index, 34.3 (6.8); blood pressure 128.3/77.3 (14.7/9.9) mm Hg; eGFR 94.9 (16.8) mL/min/1.73 m2; and median UACR, 6.4 (IQR 3.1-16.9) mg/g; 2933 (58.1%) were treated with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors. Mean chronic eGFR slope was −2.03 (95% CI, −2.20 to −1.86) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year for patients receiving sitagliptin; glimepiride, −1.92 (95% CI, −2.08 to −1.75) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year; liraglutide, −2.08 (95% CI, −2.26 to −1.90) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year; and insulin glargine, −2.02 (95% CI, −2.19 to −1.84) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year (P = .61). Mean composite kidney disease progression occurred in 135 (10.6%) patients receiving sitagliptin; glimepiride, 155 (12.4%); liraglutide, 152 (12.0%); and insulin glargine, 150 (11.9%) (P = .56). Most of the composite outcome was attributable to albuminuria progression (98.4%). There were no significant differences by treatment assignment in secondary outcomes. There were no adverse kidney events attributable to medication assignment.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, among people with T2D and predominantly free of kidney disease at baseline, no significant differences in kidney outcomes were observed during 5 years of follow-up when a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, sulfonylurea, glucagonlike peptide 1 receptor agonist, or basal insulin was added to metformin for glycemic control.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01794143

No abstract