A financing structure once underwritten by sovereign guarantees is being tested on institutional balance sheets.
Legal & General has committed up to $1 billion over five years to anchor a new wave of debt-for-nature swaps in developing markets, stepping into a segment that slowed after U.S. government political risk backing receded.
The shift is structural.
A market built on guarantees
Debt-for-nature swaps refinance sovereign debt at lower cost by layering credit guarantees and insurance around new bonds, allowing governments to redirect savings toward conservation while offering investors enhanced risk protection.
In recent years, landmark transactions in Ecuador, Belize, Gabon and El Salvador relied heavily on guarantees from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation.
That scaffolding has thinned.
Institutional substitution
Legal & General’s commitment will nearly double its allocation to nature conservation and sustainable development in emerging markets to $2.4 billion, in a market that has totaled roughly $6 billion in transactions over five years.
Scale alters architecture.
Working with Enosis Capital, environmental partners and AXA XL for political risk cover, the effort attempts to internalize what had previously depended on U.S. sovereign credit enhancement, replacing public backstops with private insurance and institutional capital.
Public guarantees give way.
Jake Harper, senior investment manager at L&G, said the firm aims to act as cornerstone or sole investor in certain transactions, accelerating execution and reducing structuring friction that has historically slowed deals.
Speed becomes leverage.
Credit defines viability
Debt-for-nature swaps are not environmental grants. They are capital markets transactions whose viability hinges on credit enhancement strong enough to attract long-term institutional investors.
Guarantees determine investability.
The withdrawal of consistent U.S. DFC support exposed how dependent the structure had become on political will. Without credible risk protection, transactions struggled to clear at scale.
The perimeter narrowed.
By combining L&G capital with AXA XL political risk insurance and coordinated environmental partners, Enosis Capital is attempting to create a standardized, repeatable platform rather than bespoke negotiations tied to sovereign agencies.
Comprehensiveness replaces contingency.
Durable market, or episodic tool
Enosis is advancing around a dozen potential transactions. L&G has indicated that its capital could extend to adjacent formats such as debt-for-education or debt-for-food swaps.
The instrument is evolving.
For institutional allocators, the appeal lies in exposure to emerging market sovereign credit wrapped in insurance structures that can approach investment-grade characteristics. For sovereign issuers, the calculus centers on whether fiscal relief and conservation commitments can be sustained without dependence on shifting geopolitical sponsorship.
The deeper question is whether private institutional capital can stabilize a market historically reliant on sovereign political guarantees, or whether debt-for-nature swaps will remain episodic instruments activated only when public backing aligns.
Capital has stepped in. Durability remains unproven.
RELATED STORIES:
Follow SDG News on LinkedIn
