2016年-世界发展银行全球_Public-Private_Partnerships_in_the_Context_of_Public_Investment_Management_in_Ukraine___An_Assessment_71页_5mb

报告摘要

Summary of Public-Private Partnerships in the Context of Public Investment Management in Ukraine: An Assessment

Core Content

This report provides an assessment of the Public Investment Management (PIM) framework in Ukraine with a focus on Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) between February and August 2015. It outlines the current state of PIM and PPP systems, identifies gaps, and proposes recommendations for reform.

Main Objectives

To evaluate the PIM system in Ukraine in the context of PPPs.
To assess the effectiveness of current practices and legal frameworks.
To identify key areas for improvement and recommend priority actions.

Why Ukraine?

Ukraine faces significant infrastructure needs and a constrained fiscal space. The country has been working on fiscal and structural reforms to address unsustainable public debt and improve the investment climate. The Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (MEDT) has taken the lead in public investment management and is seeking to integrate PPPs as a viable mechanism for infrastructure delivery.

Key Challenges

Fragmented Legal and Institutional Framework: There is no unified legal definition of a public investment project, leading to confusion and inconsistent classifications.
Weak Capacity for PPP Management: The government lacks the institutional and human capacity to effectively assess, manage, and monitor fiscal risks associated with PPPs.
Overly Politicized Selection Process: Project selection is often driven by political considerations rather than economic merit.
Inadequate Appraisal and Review Mechanisms: Project appraisal and independent review are not well developed, making it difficult to ensure value for money (VFM) in PPPs.
Lack of Strategic Priorities: There is no clear national strategy for public investment, including PPPs, which affects the coherence and effectiveness of the system.

Assessment Methodology

A consistent definition of PPP was used to ensure meaningful comparisons with traditional PIM.
The assessment tool was designed to cover the entire investment cycle, from policy and screening to ex-ante appraisal and ex-post review.
The report includes data from the Government of Ukraine and interviews with officials.
It also draws on the World Bank’s PEFA and PIM assessment frameworks.

Key Findings

Legal Framework: The existing legal framework for PPPs is inconsistent and fragmented. While the 2010 PPP Law exists, it is not uniformly applied, and many projects bypass it through alternative legal mechanisms.
Project Portfolio: Ukraine has only a few implemented PPP projects, primarily in the local heating sector. The majority of projects are Concessions, which often lack the formal appraisal and scrutiny required for PPPs.
Fiscal Risk: There is a lack of capacity to assess and manage fiscal risks associated with PPPs, which could undermine fiscal sustainability.
Project Selection and Appraisal: The selection process is not transparent or based on clear economic criteria. Many projects are not properly appraised, leading to inefficiencies and poor value for money outcomes.
Institutional Capacity: Central government entities, especially those with PPP responsibilities, lack the necessary capacity and stability to manage the PIM system effectively.

Priority Action Areas

The report identifies 11 urgent Priority Action Areas to strengthen the PIM and PPP system in Ukraine:

Develop a national strategy for public investment with clear economic and social priorities.
Establish a coherent and holistic system of public investment programming and management.
Clarify the legal definition of a public investment project to eliminate institutional confusion.
Strengthen the legal and institutional framework for PPPs and Concessions.
Implement a centralized and transparent process for project selection and appraisal.
Improve the capacity of government agencies to assess, manage, and monitor fiscal risks.
Develop clear and transparent selection criteria for all project modalities.
Enhance the quality of project appraisal and ensure compliance with international standards.
Strengthen the role of the Public Sector Comparator (PSC) in evaluating PPPs.
Promote a culture of value for money (VFM) in the selection and implementation of PPPs.
Develop a system for completion review and ex-post evaluation of all public investment projects, including PPPs.

Conclusion

Ukraine has made some progress in recent years in reforming its public investment management system, but significant challenges remain. A robust and coherent PIM framework is essential for attracting international investments through PPPs. The report emphasizes the need for institutional stability, capacity building, and the implementation of clear, transparent, and standardized procedures to ensure the effective and efficient use of public resources in PPP projects.

Key Information

Assessment Period: February to August 2015.
Key Entities: Government of Ukraine (GoU), Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (MEDT), World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Total Investment Needs: Estimated at over $100 billion over the next 10 years.
Annual Infrastructure Investment Needs: At least $8 billion starting from 2015.
Current Capital Expenditure Levels: Only 0.4% of GDP for central government and 0.9% for local governments.
Project Portfolio: 35 local heating projects, 7 in mechanical engineering, 3 in the food industry, and 6 in other sectors were considered by MEDT.
Legal Definitions: The PIM for PPP framework uses a broader definition of PPP, incorporating both the 2010 PPP Law and various Concession Laws.

Recommendations

National Strategy: Develop a national strategy for public investment with clear priorities and targets.
Legal Reforms: Implement legislative amendments to harmonize the legal definitions and procedures for PPPs and Concessions.
Capacity Building: Invest in training and institutional capacity to manage and monitor PPP projects.
Centralized Scrutiny: Centralize the approval process for all PIM/PPP projects regardless of the proposing entity.
Transparent Appraisal: Ensure all projects, including PPPs, are subject to a standardized and transparent appraisal process.
Fiscal Risk Management: Develop mechanisms to assess and manage fiscal risks associated with PPPs.
Data Collection and Reporting: Implement a system for collecting and reporting on project completion and performance.

Annexes

Annex 1: Portfolio of current and future concession projects in Ukraine.
Annex 2: Investment projects and proposals included in the State Register (2012–2014).
Annex 3: Short analysis of project appraisals (feasibility studies) reviewed.

Definitions

PPP (Public-Private Partnership): A partnership between the public and private sector for the delivery of public infrastructure and services, involving risk transfer, shared responsibilities, and economic efficiency.
PSC (Public Sector Comparator): A hypothetical public sector project used to compare the value for money of PPPs.
VFM (Value for Money): A key principle in evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of PPP projects.
TIP (Traditionally Implemented Project): Projects that are typically implemented by the public sector without involving private partners.

展开完整摘要