The pace of sustainable infrastructure development in Asia is determined less by the availability of capital than by the need for a deeper pool of bankable, investment-grade projects.

That was the consensus of a high-level panel of senior banking, asset management and project development experts during a session of the 11th Sustainable Infrastructure Finance Summit in Singapore on Wednesday ( June 17 ).

Organized by The Asset, in association with Infrastructure Asia and in partnership with the Asia Infrastructure Forum 2026, the event saw the panellists outline practical solutions to move projects from concept to commercial viability.

They agreed that structural barriers, legal and regulatory uncertainty, off-take risk, currency mismatch, and diverse market frameworks continue to stall project pipelines. However, they argued that a more integrated, standardized, and sponsor-focused approach can unlock billions in private financing.

Bankability

Bankability is viewed through different lenses but common threads run through every perspective, predictable revenues, logical and durable risk allocation, sponsor quality, and replicability.

For commercial banks, bankability is about resilient business models and repeatability. Rajiv Vishwanathan, executive director of project finance at DBS, urges moving beyond theoretical risk allocation debates to a systemic view of development.

He notes that while capital is flowing into power generation assets such as solar farms, wind projects and other renewable energy facilities, bankability challenges often emerge further downstream in transmission and distribution networks, where grid constraints and curtailment risks can undermine project economics.

He calls Asia “notoriously guilty” of lacking standardization and contrasts India’s success, built on standardized frameworks, with markets where each project is bespoke.

Vishwanathan names three keys – commercially viable business models, regulatory certainty, and “rinse-and-repeat” – as standardized structures that let investors deploy capital with limited incremental effort.

'Don't reinvent the wheel'

For lenders providing long-term financing, Christopher Ang, group head, infrastructure and project finance, at UOB, offers a practical definition of bankability: ensuring lenders “get a dollar back when it’s supposed to be paid back”.

In other words, projects need predictable cash flows and a risk profile that gives financiers confidence that debt obligations will be met over time.

Ang stresses that replicability and standardization are critical to building momentum, reducing transaction complexity, and strengthening lender confidence across multiple deals. “Don’t reinvent the wheel,” he advises.

From an equity investor’s vantage point, Jay Ryu, senior portfolio manager at APG Asset Management, shares that bankability hinges on revenue certainty, robust regulatory frameworks, and risk being borne by the parties best able to manage it.

At the same time, strong engineering, procurement and construction ( EPC ) contracts and operations and maintenance ( O&M ) agreements are important.

APG favours platform-level investments that combine operational assets with development pipelines, enabling scale and diversification in heterogeneous Asian markets.

ESG considerations are now non-negotiable, with caution around fossil exposure driven by both ethics and long-term technology risk, Ryu emphasizes.

Sponsor quality

Daniel Wiedmer, director, infrastructure finance, Southeast Asia, East Asia, and the Pacific, at the Asian Development Bank ( ADB ), points to the importance of sponsor quality, noting that strong sponsors step in when projects face technical or financial stress, saving projects that might otherwise fail.

Even complex assets like data centres ultimately rely on traditional project finance principles, off-take contracts with strong credits and predictable cash flows, he says.

Environmental and social ( E&S ) safeguards are essential, not just for compliance but as a proxy for broader project quality. ADB has walked away from deals where sponsors refused to implement appropriate mitigation measures, decisions that were later vindicated when adverse events materialized, Wiedmer shares.

In the local currency bond market, Munho Choi, principal investment specialist at Credit Guarantee and Investment Facility ( CGIF ) notes that project bonds face the added challenge of appealing to a broader, often less specialized investor base.

CGIF’s guarantees operate as credit substitution, enabling bonds to carry its AA rating. This is especially vital in Asean, where project bonds remain nascent and investors frequently require 100% guarantees for principal and interest, Choi adds.

Financing pitfalls

The panellists agree that bankability is often undermined by overly complex project structures and poor risk allocation. Developers need to look beyond the headline asset and consider factors such as grid readiness, off-take arrangements, and downstream risks.

Financing becomes more challenging when risks such as power curtailment, resource variability or market exposure remain with sponsors rather than being assigned to the parties best equipped to manage them.

Regulatory fragmentation across Asia also continues to hinder project financing, the panellists said, forcing investors and lenders to structure transactions on a case-by-case basis.

Early collaboration between developers, banks, and multilateral institutions can further align commercial objectives with policy frameworks. Ultimately, attracting long-term private capital depends on predictable regulation, appropriate risk-sharing, and high standards of project execution.

Anupam Misra, head of group corporate finance at Adani Group, emphasizes that, from a developer’s perspective, projects must generate returns above their cost of capital, with residual risk ultimately resting with the sponsor.

Financing structures should therefore reflect the underlying risk profile. Contracted assets can support higher levels of debt, while projects with greater market exposure require more equity.

Misra says funding sources also vary by project type, with domestic banks often better suited to assets requiring deep local market knowledge and international lenders more active in contracted infrastructure projects.

Standardized structures

Misra also argues that standardization is critical to scaling investment. While equity structures can accommodate customization, debt financing benefits from consistent frameworks that enable faster underwriting and broader participation.

He cites the US market as an example of how standardized debt structures can support large-scale capital deployment. Adani’s strategy of greater vertical integration, he points out, is intended to reduce execution risk and create more predictable, financeable projects from the outset.

The panel’s message is that Asia can only unlock the scale of private financing required by adopting systemic development views, standardizing structures, ensuring strong sponsor governance, and using blended finance strategically to address risks.

With early engagement between financiers, sponsors, and governments, together with disciplined sustainability and regulatory certainty, concepts can be transformed into investment-grade assets that will in turn attract long-term capital across the region’s diverse markets.