Syndicate content

infrastructure financing gap

Maximizing finance for safe and resilient roads

Daniel Pulido's picture


Around the world, roads remain the dominant mode of transport and are among the most heavily-used types of infrastructure, accounting for about 80% of the distance travelled for individuals and 50% for goods.

Despite this intensive use, the funding available for road maintenance has been inadequate, leaving roads in many countries unsafe and unfit for purpose.

To make matters worse, roads are also very vulnerable to climate and disaster risk: when El Niño hit Peru in 2017, the related flooding damaged about 18% of the Peruvian road network in just one month.

It is no surprise then that roads are the sector that will require the most financing. In fact, the G20 estimates that roads account for more than half of the $15 trillion investment gap in infrastructure through 2040.

Railways are the future—so how can countries finance them?

Martha Lawrence's picture
Photo: Kavya Bhat/Flickr
As a railway expert working for the World Bank, I engage with many client countries that are looking to expand or upgrade their railway systems. Whenever someone pitches a railway investment, my first question is always, “What are your trains going to carry?” I ask this question because it is fundamental to railway financing. 

Railways are very capital intensive and increasingly need to attract financing from the private sector to be successful. That is why the World Bank recently updated its Railway Toolkit to include more information and case studies on railway financing. Here, in a nutshell are the key lessons about railway financing from this update. 

​Toward an effective PPP business model: An eight-point plan for closing the infrastructure gap

Thomas Maier's picture
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
The global need for infrastructure is significant, particularly in emerging markets. By consensus estimates from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to the Boston Consulting Group and the World Bank Group, the estimated annual global infrastructure investment need is about US$3.7 trillion – of which only about $2.7 trillion is currently met on an annual basis. 

This much-discussed “infrastructure gap” is large and it is widening. Even if fiscal conditions in developed and emerging economies improve, the need introduced by the infrastructure financing gap is unlikely to be met from public sources alone. This generates an expectation that private capital and user charges must be mobilized to fill these gaps.

But this is an entirely predictable problem, and over many years the international community has made efforts to provide assistance in building public-private partnership (PPP) capacity in emerging markets. Finding ways to leverage private sector investment through sound, consistent and sustained public sector policies should be a focal point for governments around the world.  International financial institutions (IFIs), given their unique relationships with emerging market governments, can and do play an important role. The community of professionals in multilateral development banks (MDBs) is listening; MDBs are willing and able partners.

Of course, stating that idea is one thing; practicing it is another. Here are eight ways that together, we can move from the theoretical to the actual and reach our goals for infrastructure.

How national PPP units can influence regional performance: Korea’s experience

Kang-Soo Kim's picture

Kang-Soo Kim is Executive Director, Public and Private Infrastructure Investment Management Center (PIMAC), at the Korea Development Institute (KDI), the Republic of Korea’s leading think tank on national economic development. In this blog entry, he explains how national Public-Private Partnership (PPP) units can influence regional economic performance.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

What advice would you give governments creating a PPP unit?

First, for a government considering this, the vision for PPP needs to be established and shared with others. Second, clearly distinguished roles and functions must be institutionalized. Third, expertise needs to be developed in fields like law, finance, accounting, economics, development, and engineering. Fourth, active benchmarking of developed PPP economies and cooperation with other PPP units should be encouraged and promoted

Overall, it’s critical to remember that a PPP unit’s expertise and capacity is not built overnight. So my final piece of advice is that while experience is built, remaining patient is just as important as maintaining a clear vision of PPP.

What makes PIMAC effective?

The legal and institutional system that guarantees independence and objectivity to the evaluation body is the most important element here. A PPP unit should not be in any way influenced by other players in a PPP project — whether the budget authority, the competent authority, or the private concessionaire. The government is vulnerable to political influence although the private sector is the project stakeholder. Independent and objective assessment by the PPP unit is therefore all the more crucial. It is important that the government lends its support, and that all decision-making reflects evaluations made by the PPP unit.

One question, eight experts, part two: Fernando Crespo Diu

Fernando Crespo Diu's picture

To gain a better understanding of how innovation in public-private partnerships (PPPs) builds on genuine learning, we reached out to PPP infrastructure experts around the world, posing the same question to each. Their honest answers redefine what works — and provide new insights into the PPP process. This is the question we posed: How can mistakes be absorbed into the learning process, and when can failure function as a step toward a PPP’s long-term success?

Our second response in this eight-part series comes from Fernando Crespo Diu, Director of UTAP, the Portuguese PPP unit.

Although not a desirable outcome, failure is always the first step of the learning process toward more successful projects, in terms of implementation, value for money, and financial and fiscal sustainability. There is an enabling prerequisite for the learning process, particularly given the complexity and long duration of PPP arrangements: the establishment of institutional arrangements that provide stable, professional and fully dedicated teams of experts within the structures of the public sector.

A central PPP unit — ideally located in the Ministry of Finance — should participate in all stages of a project lifecycle, from structuring to contract management, allowing continuous feedback and dialogue between contract management and public teams. In such an environment, the role of external advisors has to be carefully planned, as they provide key skills along the project lifecycle, but must not substitute those tasks where knowledge must be developed, stored and used by the public sector.

Senegal shifts its thinking: Context is everything

Oumar Diallo's picture
Editor's note: this is the second in a two-part series. Click here to read the first part, "Senegal shifts its thinking: Rural water delivery moves to private operators."
 
Photo: flickr/Julien Harnels

In the rural water sector in Senegal, as with many parts of the world that have experienced tremendous changes, context is everything. Rarely does one single act spur a shift at the government level; many elements combine to prompt a change in approach.

The PPP team in Senegal was privileged to be able to develop a brand-new system for rural water delivery in Senegal (see previous post here), but our activity was just one contributing factor in a much larger national and even international effort. The political context in Senegal, along with sustained attention to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), created the right atmosphere for this PPP.   
 
Here are five important elements that came together to make Senegal’s paradigm-shifting PPP possible:
  1. Government officials’ forward-thinking views. Coming up with an original plan for the delivery of rural water depended on zoning changes. Our group’s internal study showed that dividing the country into three zones would make it possible to cluster services. Government’s willingness to consider clustering pipe systems across 14 regions was critical, because it made support from the private sector a viable option.

One question, eight experts, part one: Isabel Rial

Isabel Rial's picture

Some public-private partnerships (PPPs) fail. That’s a fact. But when the lessons these failures impart are integrated into future projects, missteps have the potential to innovate — energizing the learning cycle and setting the stage for long-term success. To gain a better understanding of how innovation in PPPs builds on genuine learning, we reached out to PPP infrastructure experts around the world, posing the same question to each. Their honest answers redefine what works — and provide new insights into the PPP process.

This is the question we posed: How can mistakes be absorbed into the learning process, and when can failure function as a step toward a PPP’s long-term success?

Our first response in this eight-part series comes from the International Monetary Fund's Isabel Rial.

For centuries, PPPs have been used by governments as an alternative to traditional public procurement for the provision of public infrastructure, although results have been mixed. If properly managed, PPPs can deliver substantial benefits in terms of mobilizing private financial resources and know-how, promoting efficient use of public funds and improving service quality.

Yet in practice, PPPs have not always performed better than traditional public provision of infrastructure. The reasons for this vary across countries.

​Integrating West African economies PPP-wise

François Bergere's picture
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

What do Benin, Niger, Guinea-Bissau, Togo and Mali have in common? Apart from being members of the eight-country strong West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA), they share a common status as low-income countries, faced with huge infrastructure needs and financing challenges.
 
Furthermore, they have decided that one way to address these challenges and sustain their economic growth was to promote public-private partnerships (PPPs) through a regional framework and strategy. This initiative is supported by the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) for the World Bank, and Agence Française de Développement (AFD) and Expertise France on the French cooperation side.
 
Which is why — on July 2-3 in the midst of sweltering weather in the leafy  suburbs of Ouagadougou, the capital of Burkina Faso,  which  is also  home to  UEMOA headquarters — 20 or so experts and decision-makers attended a two-day seminar to discuss the framework and strategy. Beyond PPIAF and AFD, regional participants included representatives from the UEMOA Commission, the Regional PPP unit at the West African Development Bank (BOAD), the African Development Bank (AfDB), the African Legal Support Facility (ALSF), the Organization for Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA), and the Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO).
 
The issues we covered included the need to:

Taming the Terra Incognita of PPPs: The case for data as an exploration tool

Fernanda Ruiz Nunez's picture
Image courtesy of history-map.com
The PPP territory spans the globe, and the debate over its effectiveness as a financing tool to achieve development goals reaches equally far and wide.

​Most recently, the Financing for Development Conference in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia sparked even more discussion about the role of public-private partnerships. The official line, spoken in a multitude of tongues, is that PPPs have an important role to play, and results are dependent on projects being procured, managed and regulated well. But one thing is clear in every language: “results” are based mainly on anecdotal evidence and case studies where attribution remains dubious, and findings cannot be generalized as they depend on the particular characteristics of the specific projects.
 
We can do better. As economists, development professionals, finance experts, and explorers of new and creative solutions to solve the problem of poverty, we must do better. And we will – with better data.
 
Lack of data has constrained the empirical literature on PPPs, in turn constraining our ability to tap the territory of PPPs and its potential to transform markets. After all, what do we really know about the economic impact of PPPs? Our first-ever literature review, underway now (the first draft is available at https://www.pppknowledgelab.org/ppp_document/2384), has laid an initial foundation for knowledge, and we have made the first draft available so that colleagues and interested individuals and organizations can contribute their data.

PPI and the poorest: New private participation in infrastructure results highlight critical role of MDBs in IDA countries

Clive Harris's picture
During this week’s Financing for Development conference— sponsored by the United Nations in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia — ongoing discussions have focused on how private sector finance and expertise can be leveraged to help meet the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. My take on that important conversation has been informed by some of the newest numbers available on trends in private participation in infrastructure in the poorest countries. Today’s update to the PPI Database, which highlights the role of multilateral development banks (MDBs) in the 77 IDA nations, introduces an important perspective to the ongoing debate over how to structure development financing for the best — and most sustainable — outcomes.
 
First, the numbers
The newest PPI Database results show that investment commitments to infrastructure projects with private participation investment in IDA countries from 2009 to 2014 totaled US$72.8 billion. This is significant because it accounts for just seven percent of the total recorded over this period for all emerging markets and developing economies covered in the database. This is not that surprising, but does show that we have a long way to go.
 
The number of projects with private participation in IDA countries is also only 10 percent of the total — a little better, and indicating that, unsurprisingly, projects are smaller on average in IDA countries. (For more information on IDA countries and detailed information on the IDA’s mission, please see: http://www.worldbank.org/ida/what-is-ida.html.)
 
But what does it mean?
Examining these figures in terms of sector activity reveals some especially useful facts for development initiatives — both those underway and those still in the incubation phase. Activity in IDA countries is heavily focused on telecommunications; even energy projects, which remain well represented, take a back seat to telecom. Fully 57 percent of investment commitments in IDA countries were in telecommunications and 31 percent in energy, compared to 32 percent and 41 percent respectively in other (non-IDA) countries. In contrast, only 12 percent of investment in IDA countries was in transport, compared to 25 percent in other countries. As we’ve seen before, telecommunications is the most commercially viable sector.  IDA countries specifically are facing greater difficulties in attracting projects in energy, transport and water.

Pages