Syndicate content

Turkey

A timely report on mobilizing Islamic finance for PPPs

Clive Harris's picture
Also available in: العربية


Photo: Artit Wongpradu / Shutterstock.com

Islamic finance has been growing rapidly across the globe. According to a recent report by the Islamic Financial Services Board, the Islamic finance market currently stands around $1.9 trillion. With this growth, its application has been extended into many areas — trade, real estate, manufacturing, banking, infrastructure, and more.
 
However, Islamic finance is still a relatively untapped market for public-private partnership (PPP) financing, which makes the recent publication Mobilizing Islamic Finance for Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships such an important resource, especially for governments and practitioners.  

تقرير محكم التوقيت عن تعبئة التمويل الإسلامي للشراكات بين القطاعين العام والخاص

Clive Harris's picture
Also available in: English


Photo: Artit Wongpradu / Shutterstock.com

شهد التمويل الإسلامي نموا سريعا في جميع أنحاء العالم. ووفقا لتقرير صدر مؤخرا عن مجلس الخدمات المالية الإسلامية، فإن سوق التمويل الإسلامي يبلغ حجمها حاليا حوالي 1.9 تريليون دولار. مع هذا النمو، تم توسيع تطبيقه في العديد من المجالات -التجارة والعقارات والتصنيع والخدمات المصرفية والبنية التحتية، وغير ذلك كثير.
 
ومع ذلك، لا يزال التمويل الإسلامي سوقا غير مستغل نسبيا لتمويل الشراكة بين القطاعين العام والخاص، مما يجعل التقرير الصادر حديثا بعنوان تعبئة التمويل الإسلامي لشراكات البنية التحتية بين القطاعين العام والخاص مصدرا مهما، وخاصة للحكومات والممارسين.
 

Boosting access to market-based debt financing for sub-national entities

Kirti Devi's picture



Many countries are experiencing urbanization within the context of increased decentralization and fiscal adjustment. This puts sub-national entities (local governments, utilities and state-owned enterprises) in the position of being increasingly responsible for developing and financing infrastructure and providing services to meet the needs of growing populations.
 
However, decentralization in many situations is still a work in progress. And often there is a mismatch between the ability of sub-nationals to provide services, and the autonomy or authority necessary to make decisions and access financing—often leaving them dependent on national governments. Additionally, they may also contend with inadequate regulatory and policy frameworks and weak domestic financial and capital markets. 

Success factors in Turkey’s Elaziğ healthcare PPP

Matthew Jordan-Tank's picture

Editor's Note: Join us April 22nd at 10AM ET for the 2017 Global Infrastructure Forum when the Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), the United Nations, the G-20, and development partners from around the world meet to discuss opportunities to harness public and private resources to improve infrastructure worldwide, and to ensure that investments are environmentally, social and economically sustainable. Check out the event site to view the livestream on April 22.



Imagine the difficulty of designing, financing, building and operating a €360 million, 1,000-bed hospital campus that serves a region of 1.6 million people? This is exactly what the government of Turkey is doing in Elaziğ, a city of 350,000 in eastern Anatolia. The facility will serve and accommodate about 20,000 patients and their relatives per day with a broad range of services including women and children’s health, psychiatric services, and a dental clinic.
 
A project of this size is bound to be challenging and complex. But the approach taken by the Turkish Government has been a success—to involve a private-sector partner through a public-private partnership (PPP) with support from multilateral development banks. How did they do it?

Renewables, solar, and large size projects trending in new data on private participation in infrastructure

Clive Harris's picture



Translations available in Chinese and Spanish.

Many of you are already familiar with the PPP (Public-Private Partnerships) Group’s Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) Database. As a reminder for those who aren’t, the PPI Database is a comprehensive resource of over 8,000 projects with private participation across 139 low- and middle-income economies from the period of 1990-2015, in the water, energy, transport and telecoms sectors.

We recently released the 2015 full year data showing that global private infrastructure investment remains steady when compared to the previous year (US$111.6 billion compared with US$111.7 the previous year), largely due to a couple of mega-deals in Turkey (including Istanbul’s $35.6 billion IGA Airport (which includes a $29.1 billion concession fee to the government). When compared to the previous five-year average, however, global private infrastructure investment in 2015 was 10 percent lower, mainly due to dwindling commitments in China, Brazil, and India. Brazil in particular saw only $4.5 billion in investments, sharply declining from $47.2 billion in 2014 and reversing a trend of growing investments over the last five years.

Predicting success for infrastructure in emerging markets: Moving from art to science

Jyoti Bisbey's picture

with research contributions from Zichao Wei

At conferences, in meetings, and even during casual work conversations, I am asked the same two questions:  “Which countries are ideal for investments in infrastructure?  Where should the investors invest and what new opportunities should they look toward?” 

While sitting in the World Bank gives us a bird’s-eye view of emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs), it doesn’t offer the up-close-and-personal perspective that investors demand in order to answer these questions in a succinct way.  Not that there’s any shortage of synoptic responses. Any number of “market gurus” can assess projects in a second, gathering all the low hanging fruits which are out there in EMDEs.  If there is a private deal to be made, then the deal is already done.

One question, eight experts, part eight: Thomas Maier

Thomas Maier's picture
Almaty, Kazakhstan. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

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 eighth and final response in this eight-part series comes from Thomas Maier, Managing Director, Infrastructure with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD).

For countries new to PPPs, there is no doubt a steep learning curve. Fortunately, there is also a growing body of experience that such countries can learn from — the key is to understand the essence of the lessons and then incorporate these changes into the design of government support for PPPs.

Ultimately there is, of course, no substitute for good project preparation, local capacity and the development of solid legal frameworks and local capital markets — we all know these are the building blocks for the long-term success of any country’s PPP program.

Focusing on lessons learned from EBRD’s region, two current examples from Kazakhstan and Turkey come to mind.

Protecting Your PPP: Stabilizing partnerships in uncertain times

Waleed Youssef's picture
Uncertainty is inherent in developing and operating complex infrastructure and services projects, and it is for this very reason that government officials seek public-private partnership (PPP) partners to mitigate the most complex of risks. Yet legal and regulatory frameworks, in place for legitimate reasons (especially in emerging markets), often dampen the private sector’s ability to address in an optimal manner the challenges that can and often do arise during the term of a concession.

It is important to distinguish between projects that exceed expectations — and therefore generate greater than expected financial returns to both parties, yet require additional, unanticipated capital investments — and struggling projects where there is an urge by the developer to reduce ongoing investment and maintenance.
 
Istanbul Ataturk Airport. 
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

“Successful PPPs are all alike…”
To paraphrase Tolstoy, successful PPPs are all alike, but every unsuccessful PPP is unsuccessful in its own way.

Successful projects are easier to manage owing to positive cash flows, and could additionally incorporate an obligation by the developer to increase its investment according to certain capacity-related triggers on the basis of floor and ceiling for project returns. This could also be supplemented by sponsor commitments to co-investment or to extend the concession terms based on minimum returns, as well as a sponsor sinking fund to ensure independence from the uncertain and tedious public budgeting process. Very often, concession agreements focus on what to do when things go wrong, but not how to continue to meet demand when things go well, especially toward the end of the concession term.

Sharing PPP experiences across borders

David Lawrence's picture
How valuable are lessons of experience in PPPs from other countries? Legislative and regulatory environments differ, as do market conditions and the overall investment climate. So replicating a successful PPP in another country isn’t a simple as following the same steps or using similar contract or tender documents.
 
But that doesn’t mean lessons cannot be transferred. Even if conditions vary, the underlying principles of PPPs remain the same regardless of where it is executed. For example, a PPP is always a long-term contractual agreement between a government entity and a private company; it must be financially sound if it is to work; and risks must be identified, mitigated and allocated effectively. The details of how these principles are applied will vary depending on the regulatory and market conditions of each country. But the examples remain valid nonetheless.
 
In Ukraine, PPPs have been slow to catch on, initially because the business climate was so weak. The country’s neighbors were all more successful at implementing PPPs: Poland has 65 PPP projects underway according to the Ministry of Economy’s PPP database, and Moldova’s first PPP established a radiology and diagnostic imaging center. But none of Ukraine’s neighbors have done as well with PPPs as its Black Sea neighbor, Turkey.
 
Turkey is a regional PPP powerhouse. The 2014 PPI Global Update, which provides information on private infrastructure investment in emerging markets, puts Turkey in second place globally for the second year in a row with US$12.5 billion. In 2014 alone, 17 new projects were launched in mainly in power and transport. Not surprisingly, Ukrainian officials have been looking with great interest to Turkey’s success.

Obrigado, Brasil!

Clive Harris's picture
Paving a highway in Brazil. In 2014, Brazil's
 infrastructure investment commitments
​drove an overall global increase.
In March we released the update from the Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) Database for the first six months of 2014, covering investment activity in energy, transport, and water and sanitation. The good news of a rebound of investment commitment from a decline in 2013 was noteworthy, alongside the heavy concentration of activity in Brazil.
 
The PPI Database’s 2014 full year update for these sectors has just been released, and it confirms the trends we began tracking for the first six months. Total investment in infrastructure commitments for projects with private participation in the energy, transport, and water and sanitation sectors increased six percent to $107.5 billion in 2014 from levels in the previous year. The total for 2014 is 91 percent of the five-year average for the period 2009-13, which is the fourth-highest level of investment commitment recorded – exceeded only by levels seen from 2010 through 2012. 
 
This increase over 2013 was driven largely by activity in Brazil. Without Brazil, total investment commitments would have fallen by 18 percent, from $77.2 billion in 2013 to $63.4 billion in 2014.  Although this is lower than H1 2014 (57%), Brazil’s large stake is a continuation of a recent trend.
 
The Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) region saw $69 billion of investment commitments, or nearly 70 percent of the total for 2014. Three of the top five countries by investment commitments in 2014 were from LAC.  The top five, in order, were Brazil, Turkey, Peru, Colombia, and India.