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.
Photo: auphoto / Shutterstock.com
As Washington, D.C.’s infrastructure braces for its first winter freeze and 2017 draws to a close, this feels like the right moment for a recap on what the year has brought us in terms of closing the infrastructure gap across emerging markets and developing economies; policy directions within and outside of the World Bank Group; new instruments, tools, and resources; and—the proof in the pudding—actual investment levels.
There may not be one blog that can capture all of those themes in detail, but here is a brief overview of what 2017 has meant and what is on the docket for 2018 and beyond.
With the World Bank Group focusing on maximizing finance for development, understanding the role of private participation in infrastructure is drawing a lot more attention.
In emerging markets and developing countries, the largest source of infrastructure investment is still domestic public spending. However, government budgets are tight, so crowding in private finance is necessary to meet large infrastructure needs. The World Bank has a tool to help understand private investments in infrastructure in the developing world: the Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) Database. With 27 years of data on PPI investments in emerging markets,
Whilst the enthusiasm for private sector participation in infrastructure gains pace, it is also important to look at the trajectory of PPI over the past decades. The numbers are, in fact, quite sobering.
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.
We’ve just released the 2016 update for the World Bank’s Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) Database and it makes for some gloomy reading. Investment commitments (investments) in infrastructure with private participation in Emerging Markets and Developing Economies (EMDEs) fell by a whopping 37% compared to 2015.
One of the prevailing notions about PPPs is that upfront costs are wholly paid for by the private sector, allowing the public to spread their costs (whether as users or through taxes) throughout the life of the project. However, this is a myth – governments, multilateral development banks (MDBs), and bilateral financing institutions all play strong roles in the various stages of financing PPPs. Just what kind of role, and how big, requires looking at the data.
Fortunately, now for the first time, it is possible to view the breakdown of financing sources for PPPs in low- and middle-income countries on the PPI Database. Accompanying the data is a recently released note that analyzes the sources of financing for 2015 PPP projects in these countries. The findings indicate that, in fact, financing for PPPs comes from a diverse mix of sources.
The Sources of Financing Note, available on the PPI Database website, breaks down the data on how upfront capital costs in PPPs in the dataset are financed globally, and by region and sector.
Standing by for liftoff
The concession of Galeao International Airport (official name: Rio de Janeiro/Galeão–Antonio Carlos Jobim International Airport) got off the ground in the second round of airport concessions. The first round dates back to early 2012, when the government issued tenders for three major airports: Guarulhos (São Paulo), Viracopos (Campinas) and Brasília.
In mid-2012, following the successful outcome of these three projects, the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES) approached IFC to assist with a second round of airport concessions, including Confins airport (Belo Horizonte) and Galeão (Rio de Janeiro). IFC teamed up with the Estruturadora Brasileira de Projetos (EBP), a project preparation company owned by some of the biggest Brazilian commercial banks and BNDES. Together, IFC and EBP were responsible for the financial, technical/economic/engineering, and environmental studies.
- Harvard University
- Harvard Kennedy School of Government
- ppi database
- Rio de Janeiro
- Olympic Games
- air transport
- partenariats public-privé
- public-private dialogue
- public-private partnership
- public-private partnerships
- Public Sector and Governance
- Private Sector Development
- Latin America & Caribbean
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.
But what does the evidence tell us about how good those investments might be for investors?
One interesting source comes from a Moody’s study based on the performance of over 5,300 projects. This data represents more than 60 percent of all project finance transactions worldwide over 1983-2013. It is broadly representative of worldwide project finance activity by year, industry sector and regional concentration. The data shows that:
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.