Articles by author
Political risk in project and infrastructure finance: rising challenges and modern mitigation strategies
Drawing on transaction experience across Europe, the CIS, Asia and Africa, this article examines the most material political risks affecting project finance today and assesses how mitigation strategies have evolved in response.
Project finance has always involved the allocation and management of complex risks across financing construction, legal, operational and political domains. Among these, political risk has become a central constraint on bankability, particularly for large infrastructure, energy and natural resources projects operating across borders.
This shift reflects a broader change in behaviour of states. Governments are more interventionist in sectors viewed as strategic, fiscal pressures are increasing and geopolitical fragmentation has reduced tolerance for long-term private contractual arrangements that limit public policy flexibility. As a result, political risk can no longer be treated as a residual issue addressed through standard documentation; it has become a core structuring consideration for lenders and sponsors. From a lender perspective, this shift has tangible consequences. Political risk is no longer assessed late in the diligence process or treated as residual documentation issue; it increasingly dictates whether a transaction proceeds at all.
Increasingly, these risks are shaped not only by host-state behaviour but by wider geopolitical dynamics, including sanctions regimes, strategic competition over natural resources, and intervention by third states pursuing national or regional interests. As a result, projects may be exposed to political risk even where domestic institutions appear stable and contractual frameworks are robust. This shift marks a move from traditional country risk analysis towards a broader assessment of geopolitical risk, which can evolve rapidly and is often beyond the control of project counterparties.
