Paper's long reign
A look at the historical entrenchment of paper in trade finance and why, despite its many drawbacks, it continues to endure.
The digital undercurrent
Exploring the legal, technological, and operational forces moving the industry toward digitalisation, and why resistance remains.
The tipping point
A roadmap for shifting trade finance from paper-based inertia to a digitally aligned future, faster, safer, and fit for purpose.
*********
The digital undercurrent
The "long goodbye" to paper in trade finance is not measured in months, but in decades, with progress unfolding unevenly across geographies, commodities, institutions, and transaction types. To understand the timeline, the beneficiaries, and the sources of resistance, we need to unpack the transition as a multi-speed journey.
The realistic timeframe for a majority shift away from paper in trade finance is 10-15 years, assuming current trends continue. However, in certain corridors, industries, or under specific instruments, that shift will happen faster, within 3-5 years. In others, especially where legal or infrastructural barriers persist, paper may remain entrenched for another generation.
The journey is likely to break down as follows:
1. 2025-2030: Early digital maturity in containerised shipping (especially with eBLs), increased uptake of eUCP and digital guarantees, legal harmonisation via MLETR adoption continues in advanced economies. Trade finance platforms scale AI-based document checks.
2. 2030-2040: Wider adoption of electronic transferable records across supply chains as legal certainty becomes the global norm. Full digitalisation likely in inter-bank documentary credit workflows in digitally advanced corridors.
3. Beyond 2040: Paper remains only in fringe or high-risk jurisdictions, and even then, more as a security blanket than operational necessity.
In short, paper will become the exception, but that exceptional status could take 15 years or more to fully normalise.
Who will benefit from the decline of paper?
Banks that commit to digitalisation, by adopting platforms, such as Traydstream or Complidata, stand to realise substantial operational benefits. These include a marked reduction in processing costs, with some estimates suggesting savings of up to 30-40 percent on document-handling overheads. Turnaround times can also be dramatically improved, with processes that once took several days often being reduced to under twenty-four hours. Moreover, digitisation enhances the rigour and traceability of compliance efforts, offering banks a more robust framework for auditability and fraud detection than traditional paper-based systems.
Fintechs offering digital trade solutions, especially those automating document examination, sanction screening, and KYC, will grow in importance, acting as both enablers and disruptors.
Multinational corporations handling high volumes of trade transactions are among the primary beneficiaries of reduced reliance on paper, particularly those already operating within advanced digital ecosystems such as Singapore, the UK, or the UAE. For these companies, digitalisation brings several tangible advantages. It offers greater visibility across their supply chains, allowing for more precise monitoring and coordination. It also accelerates the cash conversion cycle, enabling faster access to working capital.
Furthermore, the digitalisation of trade documents supports more seamless integration with ESG and risk reporting frameworks, helping corporates meet increasing regulatory and stakeholder demands for transparency and sustainability.
Digital documents speed up border clearance, enhance customs risk profiling, and support national goals around green trade and digital transformation. Governments that move first (such as the UK with the ETDA) can position themselves as hubs for efficient, compliant, tech-driven trade.
Who Is resisting and why?
Despite the advantages, several stakeholders resist the move away from paper, usually for reasons of risk aversion, legal uncertainty, or inertia.
Many banks, particularly those operating in developing economies or within institutions characterised by complex internal silos, continue to rely heavily on paper-based processes.
This persistence is not solely due to inertia but is often rooted in a perception that paper is more familiar and therefore presents less risk. The transition to digital systems can be both financially burdensome and operationally disruptive, with the return on investment not always immediately apparent. Moreover, staff in these banks are frequently untrained in handling electronic documentation or applying frameworks like the eUCP, making them more inclined to default to traditional methods. As a result, paper remains the medium of choice, not because it is more efficient, but because it is perceived to be safer and more manageable within existing institutional capabilities.
Small and medium-sized exporters and importers often face limitations in adopting electronic documentation due to a lack of technological infrastructure. Their hesitation is frequently rooted in unfamiliarity with the platforms required for digital trade and a broader uncertainty about their legal standing, particularly when their home jurisdictions have yet to establish clear recognition of electronic trade documents. Moreover, many of these businesses rely heavily on intermediaries, such as freight forwarders and logistics providers, who themselves continue to operate with physical paperwork, further reinforcing the persistence of traditional, paper-based methods.
The absence of legal recognition for electronic trade documents under local law means parties cannot rely on eDocs in disputes or enforcement. Countries that have not adopted MLETR (or equivalent frameworks) effectively anchor trade back to paper.
While some of the major global shipping lines, such as MSC, Maersk, and Hapag-Lloyd, have embraced electronic bills of lading, many smaller carriers, agents, and non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) continue to rely on paper documentation. This reluctance is often due to outdated systems that are not equipped to handle digital documentation efficiently. Additionally, these stakeholders frequently operate within counterparty ecosystems that are not fully aligned technologically, making end-to-end digital transactions impractical. A further concern is the fear of liability associated with the digital transfer of ownership, particularly in legal environments where electronic instruments are not yet firmly established or uniformly enforceable.
A single party going digital doesn't make the transaction digital. Trade is a networked activity, and unless all parties in the chain, bank, shipper, forwarder, insurer, customs authority, buyer, can process, trust, and enforce digital documents, paper remains the lowest common denominator.
This is why true transformation depends not just on tech but on ecosystem alignment: industry consortia, public-private partnerships, and legal harmonisation will drive real change.
The goodbye to paper in trade finance is not a cliff-edge drop, it's a tide coming in. The water will reach some shores quickly, others slowly. But it is rising, and those who prepare, adopting digital tools, investing in training, and pushing for legal reform, will find themselves riding the wave rather than clinging to the past. Those who resist, however, risk being left with slower processes, higher costs, and diminishing relevance in a fast-moving trade environment.