Public Export Finance and the Energy Transition, a discussion with Philipp Censkowsky

Export credit agencies (ECAs) play a critical yet often overlooked role in global energy financing. These state-backed institutions provide guarantees and loans that de-risk large infrastructure projects, including fossil fuel and renewable energy developments. But as the urgency of the climate crisis intensifies, how well are ECAs adapting to the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy?

A new study, Censkowsky et al. (2025): Quantifying the Shift of Public Export Finance from Fossil Fuels to Renewable Energy, published in Nature Communications, offers the first near-global analysis of ECA-backed energy deals. Examining 921 transactions from 31 OECD and non-OECD countries between 2013 and 2023, the research uncovers key trends in public export finance and its impact on the energy transition.

We spoke with researcher Philipp Censkowsky (HEC Lausanne) to discuss the findings of this study, Switzerland’s role in export finance, and what policy changes are needed to align ECAs with global climate goals.

1. Your study provides the first near-global analysis of ECA (Export Credit Agencies) energy deals.
Can you explain what ECAs are and how they work?

Thank you for inviting me for this interview. In a nutshell, ECAs are public agencies that support exporters by issuing state-backed guarantees – thereby de-risking deals in overseas markets. Outside of Europe, ECAs also provide loans directly. Put simply, ECAs work as a public insurer or public bank. Let me give an example: Imagine vast quantities of gas are found in a politically or economically unstable country. To develop such resources, energy companies are dependent on numerous specific project components from specialized exporters all over the world: dredging services for clearing the seabed in offshore installations, engineering services to install the extraction facilities, liquefaction plants, and LNG tankers and pipelines for transport. Commercial banks that finance the exports of such deliveries can obtain ECA guarantees that mitigate against a variety of risks, e.g., repayment risks. In case the buyer (here the energy company) defaults, the bank can then claim compensation from the ECA (i.e., the state). This being a traditional sector with ECA involvement, today it is of course imperative that they shift away from fossil fuels and towards supporting a rapid and just energy transition worldwide.

2. What were the most striking findings of your study, and what do they reveal about the pace of the energy transition?

Our analysis yielded several key findings. First and foremost, many ECA portfolios are indeed shifting towards renewables; even though not at the speed required and at the expense of lower-income countries; which we find are less likely to host ECA-supported energy projects in recent years. Globally, we find that the share of total ECA energy commitments to renewables rose from below 10% in 2013 to around 40% in 2022-2023. This trend is largely driven by members of the European climate coalition “Export Finance for Future (E3F)”. However, we also find that in nearly all years the support for fossil fuels remained significantly higher than for renewables with South Korea, Japan, China and Italy supporting the largest export volumes related to fossil fuels in our data. This clearly hinders the pace of the energy transition and requires enhanced multilateral cooperation to ensure that everyone wins on the path to a climate-proof and sustainable future.

3. Switzerland is home to significant financial institutions—how does it fit into this picture?
Do you have Swiss data, and does Switzerland’s ECA still finance fossil fuel projects?

Yes, our analysis includes the Swiss Export Risk Insurance (SERV) – the Swiss ECA – which acts under the mandate of the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO). As you mention, Switzerland is home to many commercial banks that can apply for ECA guarantees. If Swiss exporters are involved, SERV offers a range of insurance and guarantee products to help these exporters access foreign markets. Even though Switzerland had officially committed to cease support for overseas fossil fuel projects after 2022; in May 2024 the government updated its policy which allowed the agency to support gas power plants again. In the same year, SERV approved guarantees for the export of Swiss-produced gas turbines in Turkmenistan and Vietnam equaling export values of up to CHF 2.4 billion (see an SRF documentary or NZZ article, in German). Despite this, as SERV revises its climate strategy there is a possibility that Switzerland chooses to join the E3F coalition. This important step would permit Switzerland to hone its climate commitments, firmly stand with like-minded countries at a time of geopolitical fragmentation, and oppose the concerning trend of normalizing end uses of LNG, which excessively enters the market from U.S. shale gas reserves, the Norwegian Barents Sea, and controversial ECA-supported upstream projects like Mozambique LNG or Arctic LNG.

4. You highlight the need for better international coordination, particularly within the OECD and with non-OECD countries like China.

What policy changes are most urgent to accelerate clean energy finance?
At the OECD, in particular, restrictions and exclusions for oil and gas should be introduced in ‘The Arrangement’ – the main supranational regulatory framework in public export finance. A recent proposal tabled by EU, UK, Canada and Norway indeed sought to end international finance for all fossil fuels, including support for oil and gas projects. However, this proposal was voted down missing the vital support by only a few countries – including Switzerland. Beyond the OECD, what is most needed is renewed policy coordination with BRICS+ countries. Here, clear rules need to be established so that neither country (or country block) can outcompete the other; nor economically lose out when seizing necessary action to combat climate change – which after all concerns all world regions independently of their political orientation.

5. Looking ahead, what are the biggest challenges and opportunities for aligning export finance with global climate goals?

To be frank, current emission trends suggest that the ‘window of opportunity’ – as 2020ies are sometimes referred to – is closing more quickly than previously expected. We are on the brink of an irreversible climate disaster – caused by the pervasiveness of fossil fuels in our economies – which is the unequivocal scientific explanation of the terrestrial and maritime warming observed over the past decades. In this context, the main challenge for ECAs and their guardian authorities is to strike the necessary political coalitions that would enable a rapid and just energy transition in a changing multipolar world order. Meanwhile, hope in these troubled times stems from small but significant developments: an OECD-wide ban for financing coal power plants from 2021 proved effective even beyond OECD countries; the price for renewable energy that must rapidly replace fossil-fired power generation is falling continuously; and perhaps most importantly, a growing international community of practitioners, public servants and civil society organizations has built remarkable momentum around aligning export finance with global climate and sustainability goals.

Read the full publication: Censkowsky et al. (2025): Quantifying the Shift of Public Export Finance from Fossil Fuels to Renewable Energy, Nature Communications