Serbia’s weakening energy trade balance is offsetting part of the improvement generated by manufacturing exports, as a sharp fall in export receipts leaves the country with a larger net energy bill.
Energy exports declined 35.3% in January–July 2026 to approximately €491 million, while imports increased 3.2% to around €2.83 billion, according to September reporting based on Macroeconomic Analyses and Trends data.
The resulting deficit was approximately €2.34 billion. Its deterioration was driven mainly by lost export earnings rather than an equally sharp increase in imports.
That distinction changes the economic diagnosis. Serbia’s exposure is not confined to the cost of buying energy abroad. It also includes the reliability and commercial performance of assets that previously generated export revenue.
The aggregate energy category covers different products and activities. It cannot establish how much of the change came from electricity, petroleum products, gas, physical volumes or prices without a more detailed breakdown.
Nor can the figures alone identify the contribution of weather, maintenance, production interruptions or changes in export conditions.
The National Bank of Serbia’s separate balance-of-payments analysis provides additional evidence of pressure in the power-related branch. Exports classified under electricity, gas, steam and air-conditioning supply fell 46.5%, making the largest negative contribution to goods-export growth.
That activity-based measure is narrower than the broader energy grouping and should not be treated as an interchangeable total.
Together, the figures indicate that improving the external balance requires attention to both supply costs and export availability.
For the power sector, operational reliability has a direct commercial value. An asset unable to generate when prices are favourable loses potential revenue. If domestic demand must then be covered through purchases, the financial effect can be greater.
The size of that exposure depends on the timing of production and consumption. Annual energy balances can conceal periods of surplus and shortage with very different market prices.
A country can export substantial quantities during low-price periods and still face a costly import requirement when supply is tight.
That makes maintenance planning, production forecasting and commercial scheduling important alongside additional installed capacity.
New generation can improve the position, but its contribution depends on when it becomes available and how its output fits domestic requirements. Forecast annual production is not equivalent to firm supply in every hour.
For industrial consumers, the immediate issue is how energy costs affect competitiveness.
A manufacturer selling into an international market may have limited ability to pass on a higher electricity or fuel bill. Its competitors’ costs and the terms of existing contracts influence the margin it can retain.
Efficiency investment can help where it reduces consumption per unit of output. The strongest projects are those supported by measured operating data and realistic assumptions about production.
A reduction in avoidable losses can protect margins under several price scenarios. By contrast, an investment justified only by an unusually high assumed energy price may disappoint if market conditions change.
Procurement terms also deserve attention. A headline supply price can conceal exposure to volume deviations, changing consumption profiles or other contractual charges.
For a factory with variable orders, those provisions can become material. The commercial comparison should therefore consider the expected total cost under realistic operating conditions.
The wider opportunity extends to maintenance companies, metering providers, control-system specialists and energy-service businesses. Their contribution is strongest when they can demonstrate improved availability or lower consumption.
At national level, the challenge is to prevent gains earned by competitive manufacturers from being absorbed by recurring energy underperformance.
This does not imply that all energy imports should be eliminated. Imports can be commercially efficient and support supply security. The concern is whether they arise from sensible trading decisions or avoidable weaknesses in domestic production.
Serbia’s manufacturing exporters are strengthening the external account. A more reliable energy contribution would allow more of that improvement to remain visible in the country’s final trade balance.
