2001年-世界发展银行全球_Private_Infrastructure_in_East____________Asia___Lessons_Learned_in_the_Aftermath_of_the_Crisis_93页_6mb

Summary of "Private Infrastructure in East Asia: Lessons Learned in the Aftermath of the Crisis"

Core Content

This report by Aldo Baietti from the World Bank examines the impact of the 1997 financial crisis on private infrastructure investment in East Asia and draws policy and investment lessons from six countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam. It highlights the region's reliance on private sector participation in infrastructure development and the challenges posed by the crisis.

Main Viewpoints

• Two Models of Private Participation: The report outlines two models of private participation in infrastructure:

  • Privatization Model: Applied mainly in Latin America, it involves the sale or concession of existing public infrastructure assets to the private sector.
  • Greenfield Model: Dominant in East Asia, it focuses on new private investments to augment public infrastructure capacity, often through build, operate, and transfer (BOT) or build, operate, and own (BOO) contracts.

• Private Investment Growth: Before the crisis, private investment in East Asia was on the rise, peaking at $21.3 billion in 1997. It was particularly strong in the power and telecommunications sectors, but less so in transport and water and sanitation.

• Impact of the Crisis: The financial crisis significantly reduced private investment in infrastructure, with many projects being reevaluated or cancelled due to increased risk and rising costs. The crisis also affected the financial health of public utilities and governments, leading to higher public debt and reduced fiscal space.

• Economic Recovery: By the end of 1998, East Asian economies began to recover, supported by macroeconomic stabilization, structural reforms, and external demand from the US and Europe. However, recovery was uneven across countries and sectors, with some facing higher debt burdens and persistent issues with investment and confidence.

• Challenges Post-Crisis: The report identifies several ongoing challenges, including:

  • Increased public and private debt
  • Higher insecurity among low-income and urban households
  • Depressed investment, particularly in property and infrastructure
  • Vulnerability to market sentiment and external shocks
  • Weakness in financial systems and capital markets

Key Information

Private Investment Trends (1994–1999)

• Total private infrastructure investment: Reached $75 billion in the five most-affected countries.
• Power sector: Most significant private investment, with 261 projects completed.
• Telecommunications: Also saw substantial investment, but faced challenges due to increased costs and demand fluctuations.
• Transport and Water: Less progress was made in these sectors, with notable declines in investment and activity.

Country-Specific Reforms

• Indonesia: Struggled with high nonperforming loans and a significant drop in private investment.
• Malaysia: Maintained relatively stable economic conditions and continued private participation.
• Philippines: Experienced a sharp decline in private investment and economic growth.
• Republic of Korea: Benefited from foreign direct investment and equity flows due to liberalization.
• Thailand: Faced severe macroeconomic imbalances and a sharp decline in private investment.
• Vietnam: Continued steady growth despite the crisis, with a focus on transition economy reforms.

Lessons from the Crisis

• Policy Lessons:

  • Need for Fundamental Reforms: Governments must continue to reform infrastructure sectors to attract private investment.
  • Choice of Modality: The selection of appropriate private participation models is crucial for success.
  • Finance vs. Ownership: The report emphasizes the importance of balancing financial discipline and ownership structures.
  • Domestic Financial Markets: Strengthening domestic financial markets is essential for long-term stability.
  • Contingent Liabilities: Proper management of contingent liabilities is necessary to avoid financial stress.
  • Accountability: Ensuring accountability in both public and private sectors is vital for infrastructure development.
  • Foreign Exchange Planning: Effective foreign exchange management is key to mitigating risks in private infrastructure projects.

• Lessons for Investors:

  • Financing Gap: Investors must be aware of the financing gap and the need for alternative models and cost-sharing partnerships.
  • Risk Mitigation: Risk mitigation strategies are essential for the viability of private infrastructure projects.

Conclusion

The report underscores the importance of continuing fundamental reforms to improve infrastructure delivery and build resilience against future shocks. It advocates for the development of stronger financial systems, better risk management, and more effective regulatory frameworks to support private participation in infrastructure in East Asia.