The discussions at the Export Credit Agency (ECA) Committee meeting, which took place during the Berne Union’s Annual General Meeting in Ottawa in October 2025, reflected a global export finance landscape undergoing rapid and significant change. What was once a niche instrument dominated by lending into emerging markets on the back of exports has become a strategic lever for governments and corporates alike. This transformation is driven by a combination of factors such as geoeconomic challenges, rising commercial and political risk, more fragile supply chains, and the urgent need for infrastructure and defence investments in both emerging and developed markets.

Against this background, the role of ECAs has evolved considerably, a trend which was accelerated by the Covid pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war. Their relevance today arguably even exceeds their importance during the global financial crisis and in the years following it, when record levels in new transactions closed were recorded.

“Demand for ECA-backed finance transactions has grown significantly”

In response to the fundamentally changed business environment, ECAs have widened their product suites and are applying eligibility criteria more flexibly within national strategic priorities and prevailing domestic and international regulatory frameworks. Banks, for their part, have geared up their organisations as well. Today they are allocating more balance sheet and liquidity to the sector and hiring additional talent to expand structuring capacities to meet demand. They are also integrating export finance with other relevant product offerings such as working capital, untied and project finance, and risk management, as part of an end-to-end approach. The result is a more agile, responsive, and strategically aligned export finance ecosystem.

Demand for ECA-backed finance transactions has grown significantly, reflecting the need to deploy funds for infrastructure, defence, and security investments and, crucially, energy transition and industrial transformation projects. Since projects in these sectors require reliable long-term financing, ECA-backed transactions are one of the most efficient solutions, and rising transaction volumes have been observed over the past few years. Despite dynamic demand and amid increased commercial and political risk, credit spreads have come down and competition among export finance banks remains intense. This paradox reflects the strong commitment of the banking sector to facilitating corporate and national strategies to make trade and supply chains more robust in times of change.

As sanctions, tariffs, and trade restrictions have become the norm rather than the exception, banks are reassessing risk appetite, investing in enhanced due diligence, and collaborating more with the private and sovereign insurance market and other banks to de-risk and to diversify their portfolios. The trend towards more corporate and project finance and a more balanced regional split across developing and developed markets have supported risk diversification strategies. In addition, banks have heavily invested in enhanced due diligence processes to address both increased financial and non-financial risk. Rising regulatory capital requirements and the preferred treatment of ECA-backed transactions in general – and of export finance deals in particular – have further increased demand for ECA cover as well. At the same time, political risk insurance (PRI) continues to play a vital role by adding capacity to the medium- and long-term cross-border lending space.

Defence finance has moved from the periphery to the centre of ECA activity. Governments have revised their policies and priorities, and many ECAs have adjusted their approach accordingly. The re-prioritisation of defence and security is also reflected in the proposed Defence, Security and Resilience Bank (DSRB), backed by NATO states and supported by banks.

To facilitate the growing investment requirements in the defence sector, many banks have reviewed and modified defence policies as well. Appetite to finance the sector is strong, and lending capacity across the entire value chain – for investments into additional production capacity, working capital, raw material supplies, and export contracts – has grown. Banks are working closely with ECAs, and all available instruments are being applied in the structuring of defence-related transactions.

However, this is not a carte blanche. There are clear boundaries: while more banks are supporting the production and export of conventional weapons, controversial defence equipment and exports into conflict regions are typically not eligible for finance. In addition, defence and dual-use equipment demands enhanced due diligence and careful consideration in decision-making. On the other hand, there is a debate around whether such transactions should enjoy ESG classification. Both ethical concerns and social welfare must be weighed carefully.

The export finance industry must continue to adapt technically, politically, and ethically. In times of fundamental change, reform and adaptation are not one-off occurrences – they represent continuous processes. We must embrace agility, transparency, and strategic alignment. Only then can we ensure that ECA finance remains not just relevant, but capable of deploying its full strength and value. Both a more intensive dialogue on strategic priorities and closer collaboration across the sovereign, corporate, and banking sectors are essential to addressing today’s multiple challenges. The Berne Union’s annual general meeting has been and will remain a vital platform for this dialogue.

This article was first published in the Berne Union Yearbook 2025, available on their website here.