With support from the World Bank Group, Singapore invested heavily in infrastructure during the early stages of our growth. This included 14 World Bank loans between 1963 and 1975, which financed the development of the deep sea terminal at the Port of Singapore, the doubling of the country’s energy capacity, and the construction of water pipelines to Malaysia—all of which remain a part of our core infrastructure today.
Photo: Creativa Images | Shutterstock
Critically constrained public resources on the one hand, and huge existing infrastructure needs for basic services on the other, make private participation in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs) not just critical, but in fact, imperative. Crowding in private finance is essential to spur economic development and meet the twin goals of shared prosperity and elimination of extreme poverty, as well as to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
The Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) Database, with data spanning over almost 27 years, has become a powerful tool and measure for gauging the level of private investment in infrastructure in EMDEs.
Photo: Felix_Broennimann | Pixabay Creative Commons
Infrastructure is a key driver for growth, employment, and better quality of life in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs). But this comes at a cost. Approximately 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions come from infrastructure construction and operations such as power plants, buildings, and transport. The Overseas Development Institute estimates that over 720 million people could be pushed back into extreme poverty by 2050 as a result of climate impacts, while the World Health Organization projects that the number of deaths attributable to the harmful effects of emissions from key infrastructure industries will rise from the current 150,000 per year to 250,000 by 2030.
Does this mean we need to build less infrastructure? No. But part of the solution lies in low-carbon infrastructure.
Photo: ItNeverEnds | Pixabay Creative Commons
The digital economy has emerged as a key driver of growth and development across the world. According to Huawei and Oxford Economics, it accounted for 15.5% of global GDP in 2016 and this share is expected to increase to 24.3% by the year 2020—growing 2.5 times higher than the overall growth of the global economy.
However, along with rapidly increasing digitization, we are witnessing an exponential increase in cyber risks. These have potentially huge financial impacts that could place entire economies and societies in jeopardy. Such threats now typically include privacy breaches, cyber fraud, denial-of-service attacks, and cyber extortion. There are many examples just within the last few years. For instance, a cyber attack on Ukraine’s power grid in 2015 caused serious power outages, and in 2016, the Central Bank of Bangladesh lost $81 million in a cyber heist. That same year, more than 3.1 billion records were leaked globally.
While traditional approaches such as establishing computer emergency response teams and national cyber security agencies are important, there is a need to engage more actively with both public and private entities through new institutional structures, new technologies, and new business models. Cyber risk insurance is one tool that can help address these challenges.
Photo: ItNeverEnds | Pixabay Creative Commons
디지털 경제는 최근 글로벌 경제의 성장과 발전의 핵심 동력으로 부상하였다. 화웨이(Huawei)와 옥스퍼드 이코노믹스(Oxford Economics)의 공동연구에 따르면, 디지털 경제는 2016년에는 전 세계 GDP의 15.5%를 차지하였으며, 2020년에는 세계 경제 성장율 보다 2.5배 더 빠르게 성장하여 그 비율이 24.3%까지 증가할 것으로 전망된다.
하지만, 글로벌 경제의 급속한 디지털화에 따른 성장의 이면에는 사이버 리스크의 기하급수적인 증가도 자리하고 있다. 다양한 사이버리스크가 현실화 된다면 막대한 경제적 손실 발생에 따른 관련 국가의 경제와 사회를 큰 혼란에 빠뜨릴 수도 있다. 주요한 사이버 위협으로는 개인정보유출, 사이버사기, 서비스장애 및 사이버협박 등이 있다. 최근 사례를 살펴보면, 2015년 우크라이나 변전소에 대한 사이버 공격으로 인한 대규모 정전사태와 2016년 방글라데시 중앙은행의 8,100만 달러 해킹 도난사례가 있다. 2016년 전세계적으로 한해에만 31억 건 이상의 기록이 유출된 것으로 파악된다.
각 국가 차원의 사이버 보안 기관 및 사이버사고 대응팀 설립 등 기존의 접근방식도 중요하지만, 공공 부문과 민간 부문이 공동으로 필요한 제도를 구축하고 최적의 기술을 활용할 수 있는 지속가능한 비즈니스 모델을 제시하는 새로운 솔루션이 필요한 시점이다. 사이버 리스크 보험은 이와 같은 과제를 해결하는 데 가장 적합한 해결책이다.
Photo: Grzegorz Zdanowski / Pexels Creative Commons
Some regard institutional investors—with their deep pockets—as the white knights filling the huge investment gaps in infrastructure development in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs). The IMF estimates that some 100 trillion dollars are held by pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, mutual funds, and other institutional investors. Unquestionably, the long-term nature of their liabilities matches the long-term financing requirements of infrastructure projects. So, it’s no surprise that institutional investors are seen as the white knights of infrastructure finance.
Welcome to the “10 Candid Career Questions” series, introducing you to the infrastructure and PPP professionals who do the deals, analyze the data, and strategize on the next big thing. Each of them followed a different path into infra and/or PPP practice, and this series offers an inside look at their backgrounds, motivations, and choices. Each blogger receives the same 15 questions and answers 10 or more that tell their career story candidly and without jargon. We believe you’ll be as surprised and inspired as we were.
Photo: Gustave Deghilage | Flickr Creative Commons
Does experience in implementing Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) reduce a country's chances of contract failure?
In a recent study entitled Do Countries Learn from Experience in Infrastructure PPPs, we set out to empirically test whether general PPP experience impacts the success of projects—in this case, captured by a project's ability to forego the most extreme forms of failure that lead to cancellation.
Most of us carry out research and report our findings with the expectation—or at least a hope—of an audience.
Yet fewer amongst us are familiar with our audience, even though their feedback may help us improve our work.
We, the team behind the Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) Database—the most comprehensive database of private investments in infrastructure in the developing world—continue to strengthen the database and our ensuing analyses. Learning more about our audience is an important component of these efforts.
Photo: Lufa Farms | Flickr Creative Commons
Have you ever walked around a megastore, lost in the aisles of choices, only to go home without the one item you set out for? Conversely, have you ever wandered into a much smaller “mom and pop” shop and found everything you need?
Many reasons compel us to support small and medium businesses: tailored knowledge, personalized service, and the satisfaction of contributing directly to the local economy.
The benefits of supporting such small and medium-sized enterprises, or SMEs, carry over into Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs). But often, these enterprises find themselves “crowded out” by the bigger players in infrastructure. SMEs in developing countries may find it particularly costly and time consuming to comply with complex pre-qualification criteria or bidding documents, leaving them unable to compete with market leaders. This is unfortunate, because , decrease costs, facilitate logistics, encourage increased competition, and create broader opportunities for economic development.
These vital and homegrown engines of growth are the focus of a new section on the PPP in Infrastructure Resource Center (PPPIRC) that links the policies, laws, and contractual clauses that can foster a more inclusive approach to SMEs in PPPs.