Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (reviewed) (13)
- Article (unreviewed) (13)
- Study Thesis (13)
- Working Paper (13)
- Part of a Book (5)
- Book (2)
Keywords
- Export (24)
- COVID-19 (17)
- Government Measures (13)
- Trade (10)
- Corona (9)
- Crisis (8)
- Finance (7)
- ECA (5)
- Innovation (3)
- Insurance (3)
Institute
- IfTI - Institute for Trade and Innovation (59) (remove)
Open Access
- Open Access (39)
- Closed (8)
- Closed Access (5)
- Bronze (2)
- Diamond (2)
- Gold (1)
- Hybrid (1)
Germany was considered the world's export champion for a long time, until it was overtaken by China in 2009. Both nations provide officially supported export credits to national exporting organizations, but the two systems operate differently. German export credit guarantees serve as a substitute when the private market is unable to assume the risks of exporting companies. The German Export Credit Agency Euler Hermes is responsible for processing applications on behalf of the Federal Government. China belongs to the largest providers of export finance with the institutions China EXIM and Sinosure. While Germany is bound by the OECD consensus, which defines the level playing field, Chinese export credit agencies have greater flexibility not being bound by international rules or agreements.
Disruptive innovations can solve major global challenges. However, the system in Germany does not sufficiently favor the development of such innovations. The disruptive output of leading nations like the United States puts increasing pressure on Germany’s innovation leadership. The German innovation agency SPRIND was founded in 2019 and is a suitable instrument to promote disruptive innovations. The SPRIND itself cites the American innovation agency DARPA, which has been promoting disruptive innovations since 1958, a role model. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to conduct a comparative analysis of DARPA and SPRIND. To answer the research question, secondary sources were used. In addition, two expert interviews were conducted with employees of SPRIND. The result of this paper is a systematic comparison that identifies the key differences and similarities between the two agencies. SPRIND is based on DARPA in key success factors, such as the person-centered approach, funding instruments or risk management. However, compared to DARPA, SPRIND has a major disadvantage; namely several administrative hurdles which inhibit agile action.
Supporting the COVID-19 response in Asia and the Pacific—The role of the Asian Development Bank.
(2020)
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all countries of the Asia Pacific region over the last few months with far reaching economic, health and social consequences. To counter the impact, governments have accelerated their health spending and announced large macroeconomic stabilization and stimulus policy packages. As with past disasters and crises in the region, the Asian Development Bank has reacted with a number of targeted support interventions since the very early stages of the outbreak. In mid- April 2020, the Bank then put forward a comprehensive COVID-19 Response Package totalling $20 billion to support its member countries which rests on four pillars.
The last few months have proven that multilateral development banks like the Asian Development Bank have the ability to respond quickly and to mobilize significant resources for a global emergency like COVID-19. Whilst this financial supported is urgently needed at this point, attention will need to be paid on how debt sustainability for low- and middle-income countries can be ensured in the coming years. Given the unprecedented scale of and uncertainty around the COVID-19 pandemic, it may offer a window of opportunity to redesign the way developmental finance is coordinated and the way it is delivered. This also includes a chance to “build back better” and to focus on a sustainable, resilient and green recovery.
If the current situation could be described in one word, it would be ‘uncertainty’. In times of global crisis, it is important to support the economy to keep businesses alive. Therefore, this paper shows the Finnish government measures and how exporters can benefit from them. Looking in particular at the maritime sector, the research pointed out that there were not that many specific measures for exporters and shipbuilders. This essay detected that the provided measures are suitable for the needs of the affected companies and are an effective instrument by the government to stabilise the industry. This is proved by the number of companies taking advantage of these loans, grants and guarantees. Due to the already mentioned uncertainty, it remains unclear how measures have to be adjusted in the future.
Africa was the last region to witness significant spread of the COVID-19. Nonetheless, it was expected that the continent would be hardest hit due to the fragility of its health and social infrastructure as well as the vulnerability of its economies. While the rates of infection and death were initially relatively low and contained economically, the continent was hard hit early on. Cuts in credit and trade services by international banks, along with a decline in export earnings, tourism receipts, and inward remittances, have severely constrained the ability of African countries to finance imports of essential goods and to service maturing debt obligations.
However, Africa has over time created mechanisms and institutions to help cushion its economies from the adverse consequences of global shocks. Among these institutions is Afreximbank, which emerged out of the debt crisis of the 1980s. This paper presents an overview of the Bank’s support to African countries in dealing with two major derivatives of the COVID-19 pandemic: the trade finance challenges resulting from cuts in international financial flows to the continent, and the health consequences of the pandemic.
As the world economy rapidly decarbonises to meet global climate goals, the export credit sector must keep pace. Countries representing over two-thirds of global GDP have now set net zero targets, as have hundreds of private financial institutions. Public and private initiatives are now working to develop new standards and methodologies for shifting investment portfolios to decarbonisation pathways based on science.
However, export credit agencies (ECAs) are only at the beginning stages of this seismic transformation. On the one hand, the net zero transition creates risks to existing business models and clients for the many ECAs, while on the other, it creates a significant opportunity for ECAs to refocus their support to help countries and trade partners meet their climate targets. ECAs can best take advantage of this transition, and minimise its risks, by setting net zero targets and adopting credible plans to decarbonise their portfolios. Collaboration across the sector can be a powerful tool for advancing this goal.
Financing trade and development sustainably will be crucial for Africa. Enhanced collaboration between multilateral development banks, development finance institutions and ECAs could greatly enhance intra-regional trade. Furthermore, setting up a ‘level playing field’ on the continent will allow governments to make strategic interventions for successful export credits and trade finance solutions, fostering growth through trade. African trade is already showing signs of rebounding from the coronavirus- induced recession. Through concerted, co-operative and continent-wide efforts, drawing on the knowledge and resources of all types of institutions and policy experts, Africa will continue to grow confidently and quickly into its increasingly important role as an engine of economic growth and global trade.
The global pathway to net zero emissions by 2050 requires governments to implement and strengthen climate policies as global emissions are reaching record level. Climate finance plays a crucial role in the net zero transition. It refers to local, national or transnational financing seeking to support mitigation and adaptation actions that address climate change. Public export-import banks (EXIMs) and government export credit agencies (ECAs) are highly influential actors for climate action. Although there is no consensus among EXIMs and ECAs on how to define climate finance, 20 institutions assessed in this report give evidence that they significantly support climate action related transactions: EXIM and ECA financing and insurance amounted to EUR 6.7-8.4 billion in 2020, much more than estimated by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI). However, the results also show that EXIM and ECA lending and insurance activities must rise substantially in order to contribute to the climate finance volumes required by 2030 as estimated by CPI. To retain their current proportion relative to other climate finance flows, assessed institutions would need to increase their climate financing 6.8 times to between EUR 45.3 billion and EUR 57.4 billion by 2030.