Skip Navigation Links
Skip Navigation LinksHome > Other Resources
Last data update: June, 2015

Other Resources

Over the last fifteen years, governments around the world pursued policies to involve the private sector in the delivery and financing of infrastructure services. Private participation in infrastructure (PPI) and reforms were driven by the high costs and poor performance of state-owned network utilities. The scale of this move away from the dominant public sector model was far more rapid than had been anticipated at the start of the 1990s with investment flows peaked at US$114 billion in 1997. But they sharply fall after that, and recently recovered.

The following resources aim at providing the broader context in which the data collected by the PPI Project database have taken place. The resources include toolkits to design PPI schemes, websites that contains papers discussing PPI issues or transaction information, and selected reading lists of papers dealing with private participation in the different infrastructure sectors, and reviewing country or project level experiences.
Skip Navigation Links
Multisector Papers
Energy   Papers
Telecom Papers
Transport Papers
Water   Papers

Multisector Papers

This reading list includes some of the papers which use the PPI Project database as basis for further research or discuss trends in private participation in infrastructure. It also contains papers reviewing experiences with private participation or dealing with issues that it involves.
Spending on Public Infrastructure: A Practitioner's Guide
Author: Cecilia Briceno-Garmendia, Afua Sarkodie
Source: World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5905, December 2011
A methodological tool to support the collection and preparation of standardized, comprehensive data regarding public spending on infrastructure services that can be rigorously compared across countries. Infrastructure is defined to cover six sectors: irrigation, energy (primarily power), transport, communication, wastewater management, and water supply. The guide is designed to provide a much richer and more complete measurement of infrastructure spending than the limited highly aggregated data currently available through the IMF Government Financial Statistics.
Best Practices in Public-Private Partnerships Financing in Latin America
Author: Patricaia Benavente Donayre, Benjamin de la Torre Lastarria
Source: World Bank Institute, May 2011
Between 2005 and 2009, Latin America maintained a growing trend in investments made through PPP schemes. In comparison to other regions, LAC was not affected by the global financial crisis to the same degree. In particular, projects in Brazil (energy sector) and Panama (Panama Canal expansion) mitigated the negative effects of the global financial crisis. Although the recent trend in investments in infrastructure can be considered positive, there are still obstacles that limit further developments and PPP financing. In this sense, the participation of pension funds can be important. Among the factors limiting greater participation of pension funds in infrastructure projects are the delays in PPP process, the lack of technical analysis to define the project costs, the existence of other more attractive assets and more guarantees. The political commitment on regulatory stability and the provision of a clearer commitment for investment, as well as capital market development, play important roles in promoting infrastructure funding.
Crisis in Latin America: infrastructure investment, employment and the expectations of stimulus
Author: Jordan Z. Schwartz, Luis A. Andres, Georgeta Dragoiu
Source: Journal of Infrastructure Development, December 2009
Infrastructure investment is a central part of the stimulus plans of the Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) region as it confronts the growing financial crisis. This paper estimates the potential effects on direct, indirect, and induced employment for different types of infrastructure projects with LAC-specific variables. The analysis finds that the direct and indirect short-term employment generation potential of infrastructure capital investment projects may be considerable - averaging around 40,000 annual jobs per US$1billion in LAC, depending upon such variables as the mix of subsectors in the investment program; the technologies deployed; local wages for skilled and unskilled labor; and the degrees of leakages to imported inputs. While these numbers do not account for substitution effect, they are built around an assumed "basket" of investments that crosses infrastructure sectors most of which are not employment-maximizing. Albeit limited in scope, rural road maintenance projects may employ 200,000 to 500,000 annualized direct jobs for every US$1billion spent. The paper also describes the potential risks to effective infrastructure investment in an environment of crisis including sorting and planning contradictions, delayed implementation and impact, affordability, and corruption.
Is there an anticorruption agenda in utilities?
Author: Charles Kenny
Source: Utilities Policy, Volume 17, Issue 2, June 2009
In a networked utility setting (few, predominantly monopoly providers), it is very hard to measure the extent of grand corruption using perceptions or surveys. It is even harder to measure the extent of damage done specifically by corruption, petty or grand. As a result, it will be hard to develop “actionable indicators” of, or to develop empirically tested responses to, corruption in utilities. How much does this matter? Corruption is the result of a failure of governance. We can measure the impact of poor governance at the level of the utility, and we have a number of tools to improve their governance. It is not clear that, at the sectoral or company level, there is a significant anticorruption agenda not encompassed by this broader agenda of improved governance. To that extent, the “new” anticorruption agenda provides renewed justification for the “old” focus on institutions at the level of utilities management, but does not require a radically different approach.
Are brownfield concessions poised for a comeback? New signs of life after a decade in decline
Author: James Leigland
Source: Gridlines No. 32, Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF), May 2008.
Once expected to be the signature contract of private participation in infrastructure and for a time its fastest growing form, the brownfield concession was hit hard by the Asian crisis and has never recovered. Because these contracts involve existing, usually dilapidated government assets, brownfield concessions tackled the toughest infrastructure problems in the developing world. But the Asian crisis exposed the fragility of this mechanism, and its sudden unpopularity almost single-handedly crashed the developing world market for private participation in infrastructure. Why was so much expected of brownfield concessions, and what happened to them? Why have they performed so poorly? And what market signals suggest that a recovery in their use is now possible?
Emerging market investors and operators A New Breed of Infrastructure Investors
Author: Stephan von Klaudy, Apurva Sanghi, and Georgina Dellacha
Source: Working paper No. 7 Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF), 2008.
This initial study shows that local and regional investors have, to some extent, started to fill the gap created by large multinational utilities from developed countries retreating from big infrastructure projects in merging markets—especially in riskier and more politically sensitive countries and sectors. However, the study also suggests that the trend has been slow, that emerging market investors react similarly to political risk and to market signals, and that recent inroads of this investor group are equally determined by competition and cooperation with companies from the developed world. The potential role of this investor class is encouraging. For policymakers it suggests a need to rethink the privatization design, particularly the criteria used in selecting investors, which could be biased toward large international firms from developed countries. The growth in new private infrastructure firms also matters because it should reduce the risk of collusion and other anticompetitive practices.
Government Guarantees: Allocating and Valuing Risk in Privately Financed Infrastructure Projects
Author: Timothy Irwin
Source: World Bank
Government guarantees can help persuade private investors to finance valuable new infrastructure. But because their costs are hard to estimate and usually do not show up in the government's accounts, governments can be tempted to grant too many guarantees. Drawing on a diverse range of disciplines, including finance, history, economics, and psychology, this book aims to help governments give guarantees only when they are justified. It reviews the history of government guarantees and identifies the cognitive and political obstacles to good decisions about guarantees. It then develops a framework for judging when governments should bear risk in an infrastructure project (seeking to make precise the often-invoked principle that risks should be allocated to those best placed to manage them); explains how guarantees can be valued; and discusses how aspects of public-sector management can be modified to improve the likely quality of government decisions about guarantees.
The basic public finance of Public-Private Partnerships
Author: Eduardo Engel, Ronald Fischer and Alexander Galetovic
Source: July 2007 Revised February 2008 Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 1618
Cowles Foundation for research in economics, Yale University, Connecticut Public-private partnerships (PPPs) cannot be justified because they free public funds. When PPPs are justified on efficiency grounds, the contract that optimally balances demand risk, user-fee distortions and the opportunity cost of public funds, features a minimum revenue guarantee and a revenue cap. However, observed revenue guarantees and revenue sharing arrangements differ from those suggested by the optimal contract. Also, this contract can be implemented via a competitive auction with realistic informational requirements. Finally, the allocation of risk under the optimal contract suggests that PPPs are closer to public provision than to privatization.
Public-Private Partnership Units: Lessons for their design and use in infrastructure
Author: Sustainable development Department in East Asia and Pacific, The World Bank
Source: The World Bank and Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF), October 2007
This paper defines a public-private partnership (PPP) as an agreement between a government and a private firm under which the private firm delivers an asset, a service, or both, in return for payments contingent to some extent on the long-term quality or other characteristics of outputs delivered. It uses a broad definition of PPP because of the different goals of each country's PPP strategy. This paper seeks to answer the question of whether specialist public-private partnership (PPP) units have contributed to successful PPPs and if so, under what conditions.
Unsolicited infrastructure proposals: How some countries introduce competition and transparency
Author: John T. Hodges and Georgina Dellacha
Source: Gridlines No. 19, Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF), March 2007
Unsolicited proposals for infrastructure projects from private investors can introduce innovative ideas—but also risks, such as opportunities for corruption. Some countries disallow unsolicited proposals. Others manage them in ways that introduce competition and transparency. Governments’ decision to allow unsolicited proposals should depend on individual circumstances and overall development policies, but when they do allow them, governments will have several important issues to consider.
Facilitating public–private partnership for accelerated infrastructure development in India
Author: Department of Economic Affairs (DEA), Ministry of Finance, Government of India and Asian Development Bank (ADB)
Source: Regional Workshops of Chief Secretaries on Public–Private Partnership, Workshop Report December 2006
This document summarizes the key findings and issues raised in four Regional Workshops of Chief Secretaries on Public–Private Partnership (PPP) organized by the Government of India as part of its efforts to mainstream Public–Private Partnership (PPP) for accelerated infrastructure development. The broad objectives of the workshops were (i) to establish the developmental relevance of PPPs in the current Indian context and present the new initiatives undertaken by the central government; (ii) to understand the various PPP initiatives of the state governments across the country and identify their concerns and needs for central assistance; (iii) to understand the key concerns of the private partners; and (iv) to share the international experience on PPPs and their lessons for India.
India: Building capacities for public private partnerships
Author: Finance and PSD Sector Unit, South Asia Region, The World Bank
Source: Sector Report No. 36875, the World Bank, June 2006.
The report reviews the international experience in developing capacities for PPPs, particularly on how capacities for identifying, procuring and managing PPPs are developed and could be further developed in India. A particular focus is the possible role of the central government in developing these capacities. The report looks at both organizational and individual capacities, the former including policy and legal frameworks, and institutions and processes. This report focuses on projects where private investment has been made, and where the government is either the purchaser of services under the project, or where it provides a financial contribution through direct investment or through risk bearing. The main sectors of focus are transportation (ports, airports, roads, and rail), water and sanitation and other urban infrastructure (solid waste management, light rail, bus terminals).
Public-Private Partnership Units: What Are They, and What Do They Do?
Author: Mark Dutz, Clive Harris, Inderbir Dhingra, and Chris Shugart
Source: Public Policy Journal No. 311, the World Bank, November 2006
As governments turn to the private sector to provide services once delivered by the public sector, they must learn new skills. An increasingly common way to provide the new capacities needed is to establish public-private partnership units—as new agencies or as special cells within a cross-sectoral ministry such as finance or planning. Making the right choices on what roles such units play, where they are located, and how conflicts of interest are managed is critical in their success. This Note reviews the experience.
Urban infrastructure finance from private operators: what have we learned from recent experience?
Author: Annez, Patricia Clarke
Source: Policy, Research working paper No. WPS 4045 World Bank, Washington, D.C., November 2006
The paper examines the role of private participation in infrastructure (PPI) in mobilizing finance for key urban services, that is, urban roads, municipal solid waste management, and water and sanitation since the early 1990s. The review indicates that for financing urban services, PPI has disappointed-playing a far less significant role than was hoped for. The author identifies good reasons-practical, political, economic and institutional-for this disappointment. Experience shows that there are a number of features that raise the risk profile of urban infrastructure for private investors. Many of the measures that could reduce the risk profile are outside the control of many cities, others unlikely to change, and yet another group of steps to be taken that would improve prospects for urban service provision, whether in the hands of public or private operators. These findings suggest a more pragmatic and selective approach to the focus on PPI as a source of finance.
Infrastructure in Europe and Central Asia Region: Approaches to sustainable services
Author: Infrastructure Department Europe and Central Asia Region
Source: The World Bank, June 2006
This study reviews the status and performance of the physical infrastructure in the transition economies of the Europe and Central Asia (ECA) region during the last 12 to 15 years and attempts to identify the challenges to be overcome to ensure sustainable provision of reliable infrastructural services at acceptable levels of quality. It basically deals with the transition economies consisting of 15 countries which were part of the former Soviet Union and 12 Eastern European states which were formerly part of the CEMA arrangements with the Soviet Union and refers to the data and experience of Turkey to provide a comparative perspective.
Peru: Rethinking Private Sector Participation in Infrastructure
Author: Infrastructure Department Latin America and the Caribbean Region
Source: Finance, Private Sector and Infrastructure Sector Management Unit, Country Management Unit 6, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, The World Bank, June 2006
The Government of Peru has launched an aggressive second phase of infrastructure concessions covering all sectors, including transport, rural telephony, gas, energy and water and sanitation. To help inform the second phase, this report provides an in-depth analysis of the past program in Peru by analyzing the process, design and impact of the program as well as the public perceptions. The report encompasses private participation progress and highlights; characteristics of the privatization and concession processes; impacts of private participation; public perceptions of private participation; and a road map for the Peru Concession Program. The report concludes that to move forward successfully, a number of adjustments are required on process design and financing.
Lifting constraints to public-private partnerships in South Asia
Author: Bhavna Bhatia and Neeraj Gupta
Source: Gridlines No. 6, Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF), May 2006
For countries in South Asia, bridging gaps in infrastructure is key to achieving goals for growth and poverty reduction. Over the years governments have underinvested in infrastructure assets and especially in maintaining them. Private investment has also been limited. Today policymakers increasingly recognize that public-private partnerships in infrastructure offer the most promise for developing infrastructure and improving services. How to ensure that such partnerships can succeed? Act on critical policy, regulatory, and institutional reforms, pay close attention to the design of transactions, and tackle key constraints to private participation.
Infrastructure in Latin America & the Caribbean: Recent Developments and Key Challenges
Author: Marianne Fay and Mary Morrison
Source: The World Bank, 2005
This report is about infrastructure in Latin America and the Caribbean and the extraordinary transformations that have shaped it over the last 15 years. An upper middle income region whose infrastructure coverage has fallen below the middle income average, despite its attracting more private investment in infrastructure than any other developing region. This happen as governments have largely offloaded responsibility for reform and finance to the private sector, or simply let sectors deplete capital. This report has four key messages: the region needs to spend more on infrastructure; resources for infrastructure also needs to spend better; governments remain at the heart of infrastructure service delivery; and the private sector is needed, but bringing it back requires building on the lessons of the last decade.
Connecting East Asia: A New Framework for Infrastructure
Author: Asian Development Bank, the Japan Bank for International Cooperation, and the World Bank, 2005
Source: Asian Development Bank, the Japan Bank for International Cooperation, and the World Bank
The Asian Development Bank, the Japan Bank for International Cooperation, and the World Bank have undertaken a joint study to highlight the role that infrastructure can play in reducing poverty by supporting economic growth and providing access to key services. The goal of the study is to provide practical guidance to senior policy-makers and to support a process of dialogue on infrastructure issues with development partners.
Mobilizing private finance for local infrastructure in Europe and Central Asia : an alternative public private partnership framework
Author: Michel Noel and W. Jan Brzeski
Source: The World Bank, 2005
In recent years, the countries of Europe and Central Asia (ECA) have experienced a marked decline in investments by international private operators/investors in local infrastructure-much in line with the trend observed in other emerging markets. This decline has been particularly significant in the local water and energy sectors. In light of the increasingly tight fiscal constraints faced by governments across ECA, there is a strong need to develop alternative Public-Private Partnership frameworks that could attract private investors to the local infrastructure sector. The growing challenge is to identify and implement adequate financing frameworks and modalities of public support Public-Private Partnerships that would be sufficient to attract participation of private investors in local infrastructure without increasing the risk of moral hazard. The objective of this paper is to explore possible elements of an alternative PPP framework that could help governments in ECA to meet this challenge.
Reforming infrastructure - privatization, regulation, and competition
Author: Ioannis N. Kessides
Source: The World Bank, October 2004
The report indicates that although privatization, competitive restructuring, and regulatory reforms improve infrastructure performance, several issues must be considered and conditions met for these measures to achieve their public interest goals. First, reforms have significantly improved performance, leading to higher investment, productivity, and service coverage and quality. Second, effective regulation-including the setting of adequate tariff levels-is the most critical enabling condition for infrastructure reform. Regulation should clarify property rights, and assure private investors that their investments will not be subject to regulatory opportunism. Third, for privatization to generate widely shared social benefits, infrastructure industries must be thoroughly restructured and able to sustain competition. Thus restructuring, to introduce competition should be done before privatization, and regulation should be in place to assure potential buyers of both competitive, and monopoly elements.
Global Development Finance 2004: Harnessing Cyclical Gains for Development
Author: The World Bank
Source: The World Bank, October 2004
This report highlights sources of vulnerability and risk in the recovery in private flows, notably the likely increases in interest rates in the advanced economies, volatility in major currencies and financial markets stemming from large global current account imbalances, and fears of policy slippages in macroeconomic management in developing countries. The report also includes chapters on financing trade and infrastructure in developing countries.
World Development Report 2005: Finance and Infrastructure
Author: The World Bank
Source: The World Bank, September 2004
Financial markets, when functioning well, connect firms to lenders and investors willing to fund their ventures and share some of the risks. Good infrastructure connects them to their customers and suppliers and helps them take advantage of modern production techniques. Conversely, inadequacies in finance and infrastructure create barriers to opportunities and increase costs for rural microentrepreneurs as well as multinational enterprises. The underlying problem with both finance and infrastructure can be traced to a specific market failure—for finance it is information asymmetries, and for infrastructure, market power associated with economies of scale.
Infrastructure concessions in Latin America : government-led renegotiations
Author: J. Luis Guasch, Jean-Jacques Laffont and Stephane Straub
Source: World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3749, October 2005
The authors complement the existing knowledge in the renegotiation literature on infrastructure concessions by analyzing government-led renegotiations. While some of the main insights from the previous literature are unchanged, for example concerning the importance of having a regulator in place when awarding concessions and the fragility of price cap regulatory schemes, there are also significant differences as predicted by the model, in particular with respect to the effect of investment and financing, as well as the corruption variables
Developing country investors and operators in infrastructure
Author: Stephen Ettinger, Michael Schur, Stephan von Klaudy, Georgina Dellacha, and Shelly Hahn
Source: PPIAF Trends and policy options No3 May 2005.
This study reviews the participation of developing country investors in infrastructure projects with private participation that reached financial closure between 1998 and 2003. Their findings are that developing country investors are a major source of equity investment, particularly in transport and telecommunications and in the East and South Asian regions.
How Profitable Are Infrastructure Concessions in Latin America?
Author: Sophie Sirtaine, Maria Elena Pinglo, J. Luis Guasch, and Vivien Foster
Source: PPIAF Trends and policy options No 2 January 2005
This report estimates the returns that private investors in infrastructure projects in Latin America really made on their investments, and assesses the adequacy of these returns relative to the risks taken—the cost of capital— and the impact that the quality of regulation had on the closeness of alignment between returns and the cost of capital. Its findings that contrary to general public perceptions, the financial returns of private infrastructure concessions have been modest and that in fact for a number of concessions the returns have been below the cost of capital. On average telecom and energy concessions have fared better than transport and water. It also shows that the variance of returns across concessions and countries is considerable.
The Private Sector's Role in the Provision of Infrastructure in Post-Conflict Countries
Author: Jordan Schwartz, Shelly Hahn, and Ian Bannon.
Source: PPIAF Trends and policy options No1 August 2004
This paper examines private investment patterns in post-conflict countries based on the Bank's Private Participation in Infrastructure database. Private investment materializes first in telecommunications immediately after (sometimes even before) the end of the conflict. Electricity generation and distribution projects start to emerge about three years after the conflict. Private investment in transport and water tend to come much later. Policy recommendations suggest that the timing of reforms is important. Stepped arrangements may also be considered, including a planned progression from modest forms of private participation in infrastructure (e.g., service or management contracts) to deeper forms such as leases or long-term concessions.
Public Private Partnerships
Author: Fiscal Affairs Department, International Monetary Fund
Source: International Monetary Fund, March 2004
Public-private partnerships (PPPs) involve private sector supply of infrastructure assets and services that have traditionally been provided by the government. An infusion of private capital and management can ease fiscal constraints on infrastructure investment and increase efficiency. Reflecting these advantages, PPPs are taking off around the world. However, it cannot be taken for granted that PPPs are more efficient than public investment and government supply of services. One particular concern is that PPPs can be used mainly to bypass spending controls, and to move public investment off budget and debt off the government balance sheet, while the government still bears most of the risk involved and faces potentially large fiscal costs.
Granting and Renegotiating Infrastructure Concessions: Doing it Right
Author: J. Luis Guasch
Source: World Bank Institute Development Studies, Washington , D.C., January 2004
In the early 90s, infrastructure concessions promised to solve Latin America 's endemic infrastructure deficit. Awarded in competitive auctions, these concessions were intended to combine private sector efficiency with lower tariffs brought about by competition. However, concessions were plagued with opportunistic renegotiations, most of them at the expense of taxpayers. This publication seeks to explain what went wrong with the concession process and what should be done differently in the future to reap the potential benefits of infrastructure reform and private participation in the provision of infrastructure services
Green Paper on Public-Private Partnerships and Community law on public contracts and concessions
Author: European Union, April 2004
Source: European Union
This Green Paper analyses the phenomenon of PPPs with regard to Community law on public procurement and concessions. The aim of the Green Paper is to explore how procurement law applies to the different forms of PPP developing in the Member States, in order to assess whether there is a need to clarify, complement or improve the current legal framework at the European level. It therefore describes the ways in which the rules and the principles deriving from Community law on public contracts and concessions are applied when a private partner is being selected, and for the subsequent duration of the contract, in the context of different types of PPP. The Green Paper also asks a set of questions intended to find out more about how these rules and principles work in practice, so that the Commission can determine whether they are sufficiently clear and suitable for the requirements and characteristics of PPPs.
The future of private infrastructure
Author: José A. Gómez-Ibáñez, Dominique Lorrain, and Meg Osius
Source: Working paper, Taubman Center for State and Local Government, Kennedy School of Government April 2004.
This paper reviews the wave of private participation in infrastructure in developing countries during the 1990s and its subsequent decline. It argues that the need for private involvement in infrastructure is unlike to decline because it continues to offer the promise that it can help close the funding gap in infrastructure through a combination of improved access to private capital and greater efficiency. It also concludes that the challenge of privatization is not primarily technical, but also fundamentally political. In the recent experience, the difficulties arose in three areas: the initial terms of the privatization, the constraints imposed by private capital markets, and the provisions for ongoing regulation. The paper concludes providing recommendations in those three areas to improve private participation in infrastructure.
The Evolution of Enterprise Reform in Africa: From State-owned Enterprises to Private Participation In Infrastructure - and Back?
Author: John Nellis
Source: ESMAP Technical Paper 084, Washington , D.C., November 2005
This paper reviews the evolution of infrastructure provision in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The region has heavily relied on state-owned enterprises (SOEs), which have had a history of poor performance. This study also reviews the reform attempts: First commercialization in the 1980s, and then privatization and private participation in the 1990s. The paper concludes that private participation has, in most but not all cases, resulted in positive improvements in many dimensions. But it has not been as widely adopted as anticipated, nor has it generated the expected massive resources and changes, nor has it been widely accepted by the African public. The paper proposes to recognize the limitations of this approach in the region and work harder at creating enabling conditions.
Private Participation in Infrastructure in Developing Countries: Trends, Impacts, and Policy Lessons.
Author: Clive Harris
Source: Working Paper 5. World Bank, Washington , D.C. , April 2003.
This report aims to distill the experience with the private provision of infrastructure (PPI) over the last 15 years. It looks at the growth that occurred during the mid 1990s, and the main factors driving subsequent declines. The report assesses the impact that PPI has had on service delivery, and the consequences for other important goals. Finally, it looks at the main policy lessons that can be drawn, and what governments must do to ensure that the supply of infrastructure services does not become a bottleneck to growth.
Privatization in Latin America
Author: John Nellis
Source: Working Paper 31. Center for Global Development, Washington , D.C., August 2003
This paper investigates the positive and negative aspects of privatization in Latin America , focusing on how the reform program has impacted the poor and the level of inequality – the reason for much of the opposition to privatization. The paper explores the various issues of political economy, providing a succinct analysis of privatization's shortcomings in the region and the likely future for the reform agenda. The conclusion highlights the vacuous calls for institutional strength when consensus on how this might be achieved is notably absent.
Private Infrastructure Support from the Inter-American Development Bank Group 1990-2005
Author: IADB
Source: Sixth edition of Private Infrastructure: Support from the Inter-American Development Bank Group, April 2006.
The infrastructure sector has been the recipient of a sustained lending effort by the IDB Group. Since 1994, when the Private Sector Department (PRI) was created, the Bank Group has approved loans and guarantees to 93 private projects in infrastructure, adding up to $3.9 billion. This publication provides an overview of the Inter-American Development Bank Group's financial and non financial activities in the sector. Emphasis is placed on providing brief and precise information on the project finance characteristics of individual loans, such as sponsors, borrowers, and debt structure.
Unsolicited Proposals - The Issues for Private Infrastructure Projects
Author: John Hodges
Source: Public Policy Journal No. 257, the World Bank, March 2003.
Many of the world's most controversial private infrastructure projects originated as unsolicited proposals to governments. This Note explores critical questions for developing policies to deal with unsolicited proposals. For example, under what conditions should governments allow unsolicited proposals? And how can they add competition and transparency to the process? A companion Note reviews the methods used by the governments of Chile , the Republic of Korea , the Philippines , and South Africa to transform unsolicited proposals into competitively tendered projects.
Country Framework Reports for Private Provision of Infrastructure - Creating an Opportunity for Dialogue
Author: Various
Source: PPIAF
A Country Framework Report provides a comprehensive overview of a country's general environment for private participation in infrastructure. Based on this assessment, it then outlines recommendations and an action plan to help guide governments in putting in place the laws, policies, and institutions needed to attract private investment. While the final product—a published report—is important, PPIAF's experience reveals that the participatory process of preparing the report also yields benefits. Country Framework Reports (CFR's) are a series of country reviews aimed at improving the environment for private sector involvement in infrastructure.
Exchange Rate Risk: Allocating Exchange Rate Risk in Private Infrastructure Projects
Author: Philip Gray and Timothy Irwin
Source: Public Policy Journal No. 266, the World Bank, December 2003
Each year developing countries seek billions of dollars of investment in their infrastructure, and private investors, mostly in rich countries, seek places to invest trillions of dollars of new savings. Private foreign investment in the infrastructure of developing countries would seem to hold great promise. But foreign investors must cope with volatile developing country currencies. Many attempts to do so have created as many problems as they have solved. This Note proposes that investors take on all financing-related exchange rate risk, even though this may mean higher tariffs for consumers as a premium for bearing that risk.
Exchange Rate Risk: Reviewing the Record for Private Infrastructure Contracts
Author: Philip Gray and Timothy Irwin
Source: Public Policy Journal No. 262, the World Bank, June 2003
Over the life of a typical contract for an infrastructure project - say, 25 years - the value of developing country currencies is likely to fall substantially. Sometimes the decline is gradual, but sometimes it is precipitous. Many contracts have been structured so that taxpayers or customers bear the exchange rate risk. During crises the result has often been traumatic: governments breach contracts, adversely affecting their access to capital markets, or customers must bear large price hikes, undermining support for privatization. This Note tracks the record. A companion Note proposes better ways to manage exchange rate risk.
Private infrastructure in East Asia: lessons learned in the aftermath of the crisis, Volume1
Author: Baietti, Aldo
Source: World Bank technical paper series; no. WTP 501, the World Bank, April 2001
Private participation in infrastructure has taken two distinct forms in the developing world. The first model, applied primarily in Latin America, focuses on privatization of existing infrastructure assets. The second, applied largely in East Asia, focuses on retaining existing assets in the public sector but seeking private sector involvement to augment capacity through new greenfield investments. The financial crisis that emerged in East Asia in mid-1997 threatened to undermine much of the progress the region had made in applying this second model to mobilize private investment and financing for infrastructure. This report describes the background of the 1997 financial crisis in East Asia and its impact on private investment in the region's infrastructure. It then analyzes lessons learned in the aftermath of the crisis in six countries--Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam--and explores how these countries can respond to the new challenges.
Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects Database, Mailstop MC4 419, 1818 H St. NW, Washington, DC 20433
© The World Bank Group, All Rights Reserved.   Legal